During the course of this project, a number of community members have written in to the website to raise a important, substantive issues about the planning process, and we have responded as best we can. To further the discussion of these issues, we have decided to post this input and those responses. We have removed names and personal details to protect the privacy of those who have written in. 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/1

After tonight’s meeting, I looked at the area on Google Earth. What I see as a problem with traffic flow is that N. Druid Hills Road is the only way for local and thru traffic to get across I-85. Here are a few observations:

1. Bring Corporate Blvd. *over* I-85 to tie in with Tullie Road.
2. Bring W. Druid Hills Place *over* I-85 to tie in with Executive Park Drive South.

These two road extensions would tie into Mr. Garvin’s proposed loop and grid system to provide more access between the study area and Buford Highway, creating a 2nd loop around the I-85 interchange.

To address the concern of getting traffic onto I-85, build a flyover bridge from N. Druid Hills westbound to I-85 southbound. This would eliminate the need for vehicles cueing up at a left-turn stop light.

In Mr. Garvin’s presentation tonight, I wish his proposed loop system had better displayed the realignment of the intersection of Sheridan Road and Executive Park Drive. I would hope that Sheridan Road will end as a T at the new intersection and that Executive Park Drive will take over the portion of Sheridan that runs to Briarcliff. This might have made more sense to those who are “spacially challenged”.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for your input, and for your astute observations. You are absolutely right that I-85 is a major barrier to north-south traffic flow. We are examining options for crossing I-85 to determine if we can find ways to create additional connections that are physically feasible and cost-effective.

We also appreciate your input about the intersection of Executive Park Drive and Sheridan Road. We presented two possibilities at the public meeting. In one (likely more expensive) Executive Park Drive would be extended through Sheridan Road and connect to Briarcliff Road south of the Sheridan Road intersection. In the other, it would be precisely as you described — the loop road would move into the right-of-way of Sheridan Road, and there would be a T-intersection where the two converge. We are currently examining those options to see, again, what is the most physically and functionally feasible and the most cost-effective.

Thank you for participating, and please stay involved.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/5

I live in LaVista Park and have attended all the meetings. While I am generally opposed to redevelopment, I know it IS going to happen. After the last meeting I started to think about what I REALLY wanted, and I tried to balance this against what I think is really going to happen. What I decided is that I have 2 big issues:

I want to get rid of the traffic, and I don’t want retail around massive parking lots.
I want to be able to walk to to the stores if I choose.

Almost everything else is going to be out of my hands and in the hands of the Developers. This area is no longer suburban.

That said, I think it is critical to develop a plan so that everything flows together and not just a bunch of individual projects. If we give the Developers a plan,at least they will try, if it is profitable.

Good Luck.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you very much for your input. The issues you raise — traffic, walkability, and the character of the public realm around new development — are essential issues, and we are making all three issues major focuses of our work. And our belief is that, by making a coherent, comprehensive plan for this area, we can ensure that whatever development does come is shaped to address these issues.

We appreciate your interest, and please stay involved!

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/11

One part of the Public Realm, not discussed was the possible use of Power Easement property. This comes across I-85 at Executive Park, travels south thru LaVista Park and continues to Atlanta. There was some discussion with PATH several years ago about using it for bike/walk trail. There are potential problems with terrain, and some is in private ownership; but it may add an option to extend bike lanes and sidewalks out of the loop and beyond the study area.
RESPONSE:
______,

Thank you very much for your excellent observation — the power easement could be a great opportunity, and we hadn’t known that the PATH foundation explored using it for a trail. We will look into it to see if there is some way to take advantage of the opportunity.

We appreciate your input, and please stay involved!

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/12

Alex,

First of all, let me say I support what you’re doing 100%! And I love the proposals for expanded parks and bike lanes/sidewalks. My suggestion is for the road proposal. How about just a simple flyover for N. Druid Hills over Briarcliff? It could have exit ramps onto Briarcliff and a ramp into this new development. And keep the traffic flowing.

Keep up the good work.

RESPONSE:
Dear ______,

Thank you for your suggestion, and for your support. Your suggestion for North Druid Hills Road is an interesting one. However, we are concerned that a flyover, though efficient for the cars that go over it, would no be a pleasant place for the walkers and bikers who would walk by it and under it. One of the challenges of this process has been to create a public realm that accommodates travelers of all kinds — bikers and walkers as well as motor vehicles. (Not an easy task to be sure!) In addition, a flyover would be very expensive — we are not yet sure whether there would be funds to pay for such a complex construction.

Please continue to offer your suggestions and your support. And please come up and introduce yourself after the next meeting.

Sincerely,
ALEX

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/18

Thank you very much for your last presentation. I’m very encourage by the work that has been done to this point in regards to traffic optimization.

I’m encouraged by the idea of a look through the area for the best ways to improve the community. During discussions there were some upset parties that considered the “Middle” North East Quadrant of the loop, proposed going along Woodcliff drive, to be a bad idea. This is because they live in the townhouse/condos at the end of Woodcliff Way NE. They insisted that Cliff Valley Way is a better solution. Their opinions were based on the fact that they own the townhouse/condos on Woodcliff Way NE.

I on the other hand believe that Woodcliff Drive is the Perfect solution for this sector of the loop. The road that goes beyond Target is ideal for the purpose and is utilized to some degree for this traffic re-routing purpose already. In fact even across the street Woodcliff Drive is ideal and does go for approximately 800 feet with restricted access already. The majority of the Condos at the end of Woodcliff Way could remain intact with just a simple traffic re-route into their parking lots. (Woodcliff Court / Woodcliff Place — as basically parking areas) If a couple of Town homes were taken down at the end of Woodcliff Way, this would easily allow for connection to Tullie Road.
This would create the ideal loop for this quadrant. Another reason that Cliff Valley Way does not work is that it would connect to the freeway access road. The access Road is one way. Therefore the loop concept does not work with the one way restriction. If a Generious offer was put together for the limited number of Condos at the end of Woodcliff Way this would be a win-win situation. In fact the residence of these older townhome/condo’s could possibly be relocated to MUCH nicer units that have just been constructed at Gable’s Way - - - about .5 miles north on Briarcliff.

If we’re going to facilitate the new developments and construction we need to have an effective loop system. Connecting Woodcliff and Tullie Road is the ideal and most suitable solution for the area.

Basically the rest of the loop already exists with Executive Park / The New Construction Area / Woodcliff - - by Target / Woodcliff - first 800 feet / Tullie Road. For the good of the community. These limited number of Townhome/Condos should be taken out to connect Tullie and Woodcliff Drive.

Generious offers could easily setup residence into the new construction at Gables Way. Gables Way Units are currently for sales and this would be a Win-Win for the Community and for the limited number of condos that would be effected.

Thanks again for the study and we are looking forward to a brighter future for this area with your help!

Cheers,
_____

RESPONSE:
Dear ______,

Thank you for your interest, and for your very thoughtful comments. We are very glad to have your support of our approach and the concepts we have been presenting.

The northern part of the Loop has been a thorny problem for us. And you are right, the Woodcliff Road and Tullie Road do seem like natural choices to complete the Loop. Of course, it is that section in between that raises trouble. Aside from the very serious problem of displacing people from their homes (which we are very reluctant to recommend in any circumstances), and the substantial expense of condemnation, the topography between Woodcliff Way and Tullie Road is steep, and the rights of way created along Woodcliff Way would probably be very narrow to handle the kind of traffic — motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian — the we are envisioning.

You are also right that Loop would not work with a one-way access road, and that Cliff Valley Way, because of that, and because of its location, is problematic as a route for the Loop. (That said, we are exploring the possibility of the access road being made two-way).

We will be sending out a survey shortly that asks for additional feedback on our public realm concepts. And of course, we are always glad to have any further thoughts you have.

Thank you for taking the time to be involved — please encourage your neighbors to do the same. We hope you will continue to work with us in this process, and we hope we continue to earn your support.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/18

I’ve only had the opportunity to attend on meeting so far but I do keep up w/ the e-mails and I have one ?, is it fair to live in an area that you love sooo much a location where you;ve come to know the community environment like the back of looking.
 I can afford to rent for the last 15 years but I can’t afford the housing around this area, I really would like to live on Druid Valley forever.
 Thanks

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/18

I own a home on Sheffield Dr. NE, between Briarcliff and LaVista, and note that your project plans extend all the way up to Sheffield. How will my home be affected? Are you planning to buy out homes for development? Please advise.
Thank you,
_________

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,
Thank you for taking the time to write us.
Though Sheffield Drive is in our study area, currently none of the proposals we have presented directly affect Sheffield. We do hope and believe that our proposals would have a positive effect on your quality of life in terms of improved vehicle circulation, more places to bike and to walk, and more accessible options for parks and open space.
We have not proposed that anybody buy any private property for development. All of our proposals have focused on the public realm — the streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, and parks.
Please let us know if you have further questions, and please continue to stay involved in this process.
Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

Thank you for your reassuring response. I would love to see some sidewalks on my street as we have many pedestrians walking with their kids to temple or church, especially on the weekends, and the near misses would make your hair stand on end

Sincerely, ____

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/21

There are a couple issues I would like to address. The exit from 85 bottlenecks because traffic coming from 85 southbound exits on North Druid, turns L and there is nowhere for them to go because traffic from 85 northbound takes a right on red and merges into the traffic. Therefore, the timing on the traffic lights don’t work. Adding another ramp will not eliminate this situation. Also, there needs to be an island where buses, both school and Marta, stop to pick up and unload their passengers. I waited through four lights while the bus stopped at the schools. If they had been offroad, traffic would have continued to move.
I live, work and am an officer in one of the Stakeholders. Maybe we should look a little deeper for an answer.

RESPONSE:
Dear ______,

Thank you for taking the time to write to us about your concerns. Your observation about the timing of the lights at the I-85 interchange is very helpful — we have been in communication with DOT about the timing of the traffic lights, and we will raise this issue when we talk with them.

We also appreciate your point about the delays caused by buses blocking traffic. We will look to see if there is a way to address this as we move towards refining our proposals.

Please don’t hesitate to write us if you have additional concerns, and please continue to stay involved in this process. We are glad to have your input.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/22

What are the plans for the park at briarcliff apartments?

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

I was reviewing e-mails that we have received from the website and I was horrified to see that I never answered the question that you sent in nearly two months ago. I apologize for not responding in a prompt fashion, and I hope this answer is still helpful to you.

Our understanding is that the Sembler Company has acquired both the land underneath the Park at Briarcliff and the Housing Authority’s ground lease under which they built the apartment complex. If the Sembler Company gets the rezoning they want, their current plans are to tear down the existing apartments and redevelop the site with a combination of retail and housing.

Sembler has publicly stated that they don’t expect to begin construction for at least 18 months. They have promised to notify tenants well in advance of any displacement, and to provide assistance with relocation. If you have more specific questions, I suggest contacting the Sembler Company.

Again, I apologize for being so late in responding. Please let me know if you have further questions — I promise to do better on the next one. We hope that you will come to the next and final public meeting on September 6th in the cafeteria of Kittredge Magnet School.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/25

I saw that you are going to include the intersection of Briarcliff and Clairmont in the study. Are you also going to look at how the I-85 and Clairmont exit will be effected. This like the the two Briarcliff intersections and N. Druid
85 are horrible.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____

Thank you for the suggestion. However, neither the intersection of Briarcliff and Clairmont nor the Clairmont interchange with I-85 are a part of our study area. The boundaries of our study are I-85, Holly Lane, Cliff Valley Way, and Sheffield Drive.

Please let us know if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/25
I have heard conflicting stories. Is the Park Apartments at Briarcliff to be torn down, and if so, will we, the tenants, be amply notified? I was at the meeting when the lady asked about her lease. The answer was rather vague. I don’t own a car, so therefore the Park has been very convenient for me as far as shopping and public transit. I can get to anywhere in any direction at any time of day.

Thank you for listening.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for your email. All the property owners will present their plans tonight at 7:00 at the fourth public meeting, which will be in the cafeteria of Kittredge Magnet School, at 2383 North Druid Hills Road. I would encourage you to attend and put your question directly to the Sembler Company.

Your question is very important, and your comment about easy access to shopping and other needs/amenities without a car is very interesting. Please be sure to raise these both at the meeting.

Best,

Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/26

I am in the market to buy in 2008 about mid year, how far out is the housing aspect of this project, and will it have a single family/townhome part?

What part of the project is slated to start first?

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for your email. Our focus is on the public realm aspect. All the property owners will present their plans tonight at 7:00 at the fourth public meeting, which will be in the cafeteria of Kittredge Magnet School, at 2383 North Druid Hills Road. I would encourage you to attend.

Best,

Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/28

Thank you for the meeting last night. One of my main concerns is the need for any 20-story towers in this project. While I understand that the area, with its close-in location, will see vertical development, I have difficulty understanding the need to jump from predominately one-story buildings, as mentioned in Executive Park, to a 20-story tower. The development at Lindbergh plaza seems to be operating quite nicely with building that approximately 10 -
13 stories high.

RESPONSE:
Dear ______,

Thank you for your question, and I apologize for the late response — it was an oversight on my part. However, I am now in a better position to discuss the issue you raise, because we have recently done some significant work on this issue.

To address this issue, we have been developing a series of regulations for this area governing heights and setbacks from nearby property. We are still working on these ideas and they won’t be final until the presentation on September 6th, but I can give you a general sense of what we are looking at.

The issue of scale that you raise is a significant one in this area — many residents in the area have discussed their concerns about being overwhelmed and overshadowed by adjacent development. On the other hand, this area already has a tall building — the old Bellsouth Tower (17 stories tall) — that has been standing for many years without appearing to have negative effects on anyone.

One issue that we’re studying is creating setbacks from existing residential property to ensure that current residents are not overwhelmed by new buildings. The taller the building, the larger a setback would be required — thus, a townhouse wouldn’t have to be set back very far, while a tower would require a very sizable setback.

In addition, we would limit the proportion of a property on which a developer could build a building taller than a certain height (say, five or six stories). We will also be looking at some sort of height limit, though we have not yet settled on a number. It will likely be somewhere in the range of the Bellsouth Tower.

The purpose of these regulations is to protect existing property owners from being overwhelmed by new development while still giving developers some flexibility.

Thank you for taking the time to be involved with this project and to raise this important issue. Please write if you have further questions — we promise to respond more promptly — and we hope you will come to the meeting on September 6th.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/29

I live on Mayfair Drive and am concerned about plans affecting Sheridan Road. Perhaps I do not understand the options, but they all seem to be directing traffic to this road. One of the options includes a buy-out. And I have heard that the Athletic Club is up for sale.
What Happens to homes along Sheridan and Mayfair Drive if this becomes a major 4 lane road?

There has been a lot of conversation about improving the access into Executive Park, but no comments about getting out of Executive park. And I think that the drivers best option will be Sheridan Road.

I find the slides a bit confusing. (I do admit I am spacially challenged) Is there someone I can talk to about this particular area?

I realize that redevelopment is coming. I am already closed in by traffic, but I don’t want it to be hi-speed and traffic noise adjacent to my home.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us — we apologize for the delayed response. As of this point, the one part of Sheridan Road that would be affected by our proposals is the part connecting Executive Park Drive to Briarcliff Road. If it does in fact become part of the proposed Loop, then that section would likely need to be widened to 4 lanes. There is no reason that any other part of the road or those roads that open off of it, including Kingsley Circle or Mayfair Drive, should be affected. We have made no mention of a buy-out in our plans, and we are not aware of any of the other property owners discussing such a proposal.

We will be discussing our plans in much greater depth, and with greater specificity, at the public meeting on July 25th. We hope you will come, and we hope that will clarify some of these issues.

We had likewise heard that the Athletic Club is for sale, but our inquiries have suggested that that is not, in fact, the case.

If you have other questions about the slides or the proposals, or if something is not clear, please let us know and we will do our best to explain as best we can.

We appreciate you taking the time to be involved in this process. We hope you will continue to share your thoughts with us.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

FURTHER COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
Mr Weiss
 
Thank you for responding. I believe in facts not rumors. Yes, I have attended all the meetings and will be at the next one.
 
I am still concerned about Sheridan Drive. There will be 4 entries from the Sembler project onto Briarcliff. There are also discussions about additional ramps from I 85 into Executive Park. Drivers are going to be looking to skirt the traffic. That may be to turn off Briarcliff onto Mayfair and then make 2 rights into Executive Park. Or cutting through Executive Park over Kingsley and Mayfair to Briarcliff. Not to mention getting to Chelsire Bridge or LaVista.
 
I understand that the objective is to make the area traffic friendly ( by that I mean that traffic will move in a positive way) but I think the impact on Sheridan Road and LaVIsta Park will be massive and I don’t think it is being addressed
 
How will Mayfair and Kingsley Drive be protected from cut through traffic?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
6/29

Comments after the meeting June 27…..
#1 other Sembler projects have a lot of hard surfaces…concrete, decorative brick. A tree and a couple of shrubs are not “greenspace”. Use the picture on this homescreen as a guide. Way too much imprevious surface at Edgewood, Lindberg and Perimter.
#2 Have you talked to the Clifton Corrider about bringing a Cliff bus to the development? This could potentially cut down on trips to the CDC/Emory work complex.
#3 Terrific to have property owners at the meeting and hear their thoughts.
What about property owners across the street? Fast food, car wash, Target?
Would love to see some upgrade there as well.
#4 Thank you all for getting ahead in the Planning process. It is wonderful to debate these issues before ground is broken. I appreciate the foresight of Kathie Gannon and Jeff Rader for hiring Alex Garvin and getting a bigger view of this proprety, rather than usual slice of “my property” without respect to its impact on everyone and everything else.

RESPONSE:
Dear _______,

Thank you for your thoughts, and your kind comments. We are glad to have your support, and we hope we continue to earn it! (Hopefully with quicker response times to your e-mails, for starters.)

Regarding your comments, I will answer them in order as best I can.

#1. We are working with Sembler as they continue to revise and develop their plans. We agree with you that it is important for this area — including new developments — to have substantial greenspace. In fairness to Sembler, the plans that they showed are relatively preliminary and they have not yet reached the stage of making landscaping plans, but it is an issue we have raised, and will continue to raise with them.

#2. We have spoken to Emory about their plans for the Clifton Corridor, and again, your point is right on — good transit service between the study area and Emory/CDC is essential, whether it is via the Cliff bus or MARTA.

#3. The property owners you mention have chosen not to participate in the planning process. We don’t know of any changes they are planning to their property, but as I say, they have not been in contact with us.

#4. Thank you — we agree! We’ve been very excited to be a part of this process, and we have been encouraged by the willingness of all the participants to talk about all of the planning issues here as a whole.

Please let us know if you have any more thoughts or questions you would like to share with us. We will answer as best we can (and hopefully in a more timely fashion).

Please stay involved in the planning process, and we hope you will talk to your neighbors and encourage them to be involved, too. We hope you will continue to support us when we deserve it, and to reprimand us if we do not.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

FURTHER COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
Mr. Weiss,

Thanks for your response. I really appreciate this process. I have a few questions I’d like to submit for Wednesday’s meeting and they can probably be combined with other inquiries along the same line.

-Who is working with everyone, Sembler, etc. from the County staff? While this is a wonderful process and the ideas are great, who is vetting the reality/practicality of it from the County? Have any issues come up yet that create a conflict with County rules/regs?

-How much additional traffic capacity is needed based on the 3700 residential unit demands, as well as the commercial/retail demands? I feel sure there must be a formula that could give us an idea. Along that same line, when were the traffic counts conducted? (which week)

–What is the proposed height (in feet and stories) of all the proposed buildings? Where will be they located within the complex? Has the footprint of the buildings been determined? How close (in feet) will buildings be to the nearest neighbors (residents)? How much parking (number of spaces) will be underground, surface and in above - ground decks?

A final comment: The impact of the development should be on the interior of the new space…not pushed outwards onto the neighbors. I heard Angelo Fuster say they do want to create a streetscape by bringing the buildings up to the street rather than setting them behind a sea of parking lot.
That’s great, but those buildings must be compatible in height and intensity to what exists across the street…especially residences. The concern is based on Sembler’s plan to put 20-story buildings overlooking a residential neighborhood in Brookhaven. That has now been reduced, but even an 8 story building will overpower a 1 or 2-story residence. The tallest, largest scale buildings absolutely should be in the center of the development so the surrounding neighborhoods are shielded from that impact.

I’ll be at the meeting Wednesday and look forward to seeing plans then.

_________

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/21

I am interested in the possible impact upon homes on Timothy Drive, located off Briarcliff Road. I notice that the study area ends at Cliff Valley Way which is one street away from Timothy Drive.
Thank you,
______

What neighborhood organizations/associations have joined to create the Briarcliff/North Druid Hills group? Has anyone from Green Hills community contacted you?
Thanks,
________

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for your questions. In response to the first question, we aren’t proposing anything that would have a direct impact on Timothy Drive. Many of the proposals that we’re making have related to creating more routes for motor vehicles to relieve traffic, and adding more options for walking and biking in the area — we would hope that you would see an impact in terms of smoother traffic flow along North Druid Hills and Briarcliff Roads, and having more places available to walk and to bike.

Commissioner Rader’s office has been working with us to organize the community associations we’ve been meeting with — I couldn’t name all of them off the top of my head, but I know they’ve included the Merry Hills Homeowners’ Association, residents from along Sheffield Drive, and members of the Jewish organizations around Toco Hills, among others. If you or someone from your community is interested, I recommend contacting Debbie Schneider in Commissioner Rader’s office, at Dkschneider@co.dekalb.ga.us, or calling her at (404)371-2863.

Thank you for taking the time to be involved with this process. Please let us know if you have any more questions, or have thoughts you would like to share with us.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/24

I’d like to point out that it is troubling that what is published on your website as the presentation made by Sembler Co. is not what was presented to the public on June 25. This is what was presented to the public:
http://www.merryhills.com/PDF/SemblerDevelopment1.pdf. These two depictions of their plans are very different. If Sembler has revised its plans since June 25, your website should reflect that fact, or explain that it is not the original presentation.

Perhaps this info may be helpful to you. You will also note that the website’s html code shows the file on your website with Sembler’s presentation is dated 7/19. This is the link:
http://briarcliffnorthdruidhills.org/2007/07/19/public-meeting-iv-addendum-sembler-presentation/

RESPONSE:
Dear ____,

I am eager to see the discrepancies you raise, but I was unfortunately unable to load the link which you enclosed below. If you could send me the pdf which it links to, I would be happy to look at it, and to answer any questions you may have.

The presentation we have posted on the website is the same file that Sembler presented at the public meeting on June 27th — they loaded their presentation onto our laptop computer and presented it during the meeting. I personally uploaded that same file from our laptop onto the website, and that is the file that is currently displayed there.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

FURTHER COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
Okay, here is some more info for you to understand and respond.
The following file was originally published at 11alive.com to accompany an article at http://www.11alive.com/news/article_news.aspx?storyid=99292, and reporter Jon Shrek says it was provided to him by Angelo Fuster in an email from Jennifer.Ledbetter@sembler.com prior to the June 27 meeting.

http://www.11alive.com/news/graphics/briarclifftowncenter.pdf?GID=ArSSgmeFFjZBJt6BnT/Gc1p0tN15qtdy5k2eIX+mFbk%3D

Now, the reason why I noticed the two presentations are quite different is that at the June 27 meeting, my 64-year old husband nearly keeled over when he saw a tall high-rise tower placed near to our home. Here was his question after he saw that slide, as recorded in your minutes on your website on page 9:

Q: I live on Holly Lane. Will I be in the shadow of that huge residential tower?
What is the distance between that and my property?
JF: I don’t know the exact distance. We’d like to meet with you and discuss that.

Now, if you will look at the presentation you placed on your website for Sembler’s project, you will note that there is no elevation, no tower shown, only footprints of buildings, but my husband, myself, and about 200 other people saw it. So I can only conclude that the presentation published on your website is not the one we were shown on June 27. What we saw was what 11alive published.

Perhaps you had more than one presentation file on your laptop when you uploaded it to the website.

I look forward to an explanation of this discrepancy. Thank you for addressing my question.

FURTHER RESPONSE:
Dear ____,

Thank you for sending the links — I was able to download the pdf and look at it. These pdfs are individual images from the same presentation that is posted on our website — the first pdf image is the opening image of the presentation; the second pdf image is the third image of the presentation; the third pdf image is the sixth image from the presentation; the fourth pdf image is the next-to-last image from the presentation (I believe number 15 out of 16); and the fifth pdf image is the final image from the presentation.

Unfortunately, we were not able to achieve the same excellent resolution as Channel 11 in posting the file to our website due to limitations in the sizes of the files we are able to upload.

I hope this answers your question. Please let me know if you have any other questions, and we look forward to seeing you tomorrow at the stakeholders’ meeting.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/25

I am writing in STRONG protest and opposition to the proposed Sembler Project at the intersection of N. Druid Hills and Briarcliff. I live on Holly Lane across the street from the proposed site of this monstrosity and am shocked that you would even consider approving such a proposal in the heart of my community and neighborhood. I chose to live in the Toco Hills Community because it is a neighborhood. I do not want to live in or near a mini-metropolis.

According to Sembler’s “Preliminary Master Planning Concept” dated June 27th. There is no buffer between his monstrosity and Holly Lane. In addition, there appears to be a road going east bound (roughly parallel to Lavista Road) leaving the monstrosity through what appears to be Kittredge Park (i.e. page 4 of this document). Where does this road? According to the plans, it appears to end in the heart of residential houses. We have been asking for sidewalks in our community to accommodate the hundreds of children that walk to Torah Day School each day and the hundreds of families that walk (and cannot drive because of religious beliefs) to synagogue each week. Instead the counties has considered this proposal that would add 50,000 more cars in and through our side streets, which are already unsafe when consistently used as short-cuts for motorists. Further, I am terrified at the thought of increased traffic to an already overly congested area and the increased crime.

I am simply overwhelmed by the size and magnitude of the proposal. I have seen numbers of up to 2,238,000 sf of retail space (equivalent to Lenox Square and Phipps Plaza), 4,529 residential units, 900,000 sq office space, and 600 hotel rooms.
I am at a complete loss as to why the retail space, residential units, office space, and hotel rooms are even needed in my community. I can easily drive to four different retail malls within 15 minutes. I do not want nor need a mall closer to my house; which incidently I would still have to drive to and it given the anticipated close to 50,000 more cars at that intersection it would probably be easier for me to just drive to the existing malls than the “new Sembler one” across the street. There are several hotels and office/professional space again within five minutes of my house and I do not see any reason to have to build anything closer. Finally, there are several new condos and apartment buildings being built in my community, where do you anticipate the people coming from to live in these structures. As it is now, there are always for sale/for rent signs at the existing dozen or so complexes.
We do not need more residential units.

Instead, perhaps you could consider what is really important for the citizens that you supposedly represent. As a mother of young children, there is not one park within walking distance of my house. And no the green space that you propose to put in the middle of Sembler’s monstrosity is not a park. It is a token tribute to trees, at best. I have to drive nearly 20 minutes to Tucker Recreational Center to allow my children to participate in Dekalb County Recreational Classes; interestingly I also pass Northlake Mall which appears rather deserted during the day and I can only wonder how much more desolate the mall will be after building another major mall within 10 minutes of it.

Please find it in your heard to stop Sembler’s proposed monstrosity which will destroy any sense of community the Toco Hills Neighborhood has.

Sincerely,
______

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for sharing your comments with us.

Although this process was initiated due to concerns raised by Sembler’s announced plans, the Livable Communities Coalition hired us to make recommendations on improving the public realm, not to address the Sembler development. Our work has focused on the public realm — the streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, parks and other open, publicly accessible spaces. Our work, our discussions with people who live here, and the feedback we have received throughout this public process has convinced us that the public realm in the study area is deficient. We see evidence of this not only traffic levels, but also in the lack of safe places to walk and to bike, the environmental damage caused by the enormous quantities of paved surfaces, the lack of tree cover in commercial areas, the lack of convenient mass transit, the lack of accessible parkland, and the unattractive nature of some of the main roads.

The proposals we have presented have tried to address those issues by creating and paying for a new public realm, as well as the shape that future development — whatever it may prove to be — should take around that public realm. We strongly believe that the quality of life in this part of DeKalb could be dramatically improved by the types of investments we have described in roads, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, mass transit, and parkland, and through the types of zoning principles we have described.

Your concern about traffic cutting through side streets — which I recognize is a real problem — we believe points to a deeper issue about traffic in this area, namely that cars do not have alternate routes to avoid the traffic on North Druid Hills Road and Briarcliff Road. This is why we have have proposed a series of new streets through the study area, to provide that series of alternate routes.

We also agree with your point about parkland — there simply isn’t enough of it, and what parkland exists is inaccessible. Kittredge Park is currently over 30 acres of public parkland. If, as we recommend, the land flanking the stream as well as the lake and its surroundings also become public parkland, that would be an addition of several more acres. The recommendations for new roads and trails that we are making would make all of this publicly accessible, which it currently is not. And we certainly believe that the design of these new parks and park improvements should include activities for children, though the specifics would need to come in the next stage.

The issue of the relationship of new development to existing property owners is also significant, and we are developing zoning principles that would set requirements on the size and proximity of new development to existing properties.

We do not work for the Sembler Company, and we do not presume to offer an opinion on whether the Sembler development should or should not happen. We believe that the only people who can make that decision are your elected officials, with input from local residents such as yourself.

Development is already taking place in this area — currently piecemeal, such as the new townhouse developments and apartment complexes that we have seen under construction. What have tried to do is to discuss and address the public realm, land use, and associated financial issues, that would be raised by the proposed Sembler development, the proposed Executive Park development, or any other development that may happen in this area in the future. We do believe that the residents of this area will reap the greatest benefits if there if plans are made for a new and better public realm that precedes any new development. And we do think it makes sense to evaluate any development proposals in light of the effect that they would have on the public realm, whether good or bad.

Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with us, and please contact us again if you have further questions, or if there are other issues you wish to discuss.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/25

The “study” is clearly a one way street where information flow is prevented by the very people who claim to be engaged in a multi-party process. Not that this is news, but readers should take notice of the following points.

At the June 27 meeting chaired by Mr. Garvin, et al, I raised the final question and commented to Sembler’s President, Jeff Fuqua, that the process was merely a dictation of information to the public. I further cited that there is no genuine vehicle in place for public opinion to flow in the kind of directions that would create a consensual solution to the complex issues at hand. I supported this claim with evidence: The email list of private and stakeholder attendees has been suppressed by the Livable Communities Coalition and there is no vehicle by which the community can reach its own independent conclusions, pro or con. I asked Mr. Fuqua to see to it that this process becomes a valid multi-party one, and in support of this, asked the audience to show their support with a show of hands. Well over half of those in attendance raised theirs. I have proof of this in the form of Video from the meeting. This direct question about the integrity of the process itself did not find a receptive ear on the part of those orchestrating the “Study.”

As of this date, the “Official Record” of the meeting at www.briarcliffnorthdruidhills.org, I was disturbed to find that the substance of my comments, my questions, Mr. Fuqua’s promise to open things up, and the assembly’s positive reaction to my comment was completely absent from the published record. This is easy to ascertain, since my points were offered at the tail end of the meeting and the published document is sequential.

Since the issue of community participation is one of the First Principals around which Dekalb Commissioners and various interested parties ostensibly organized this set of meetings, omission of this point raises suspicion of a deliberate intention to provide a fraudulent record of actual proceedings to the public. This is unacceptable and must not be permitted to stand. It is also noteworthy that the abovementioned .org site does not have a feedback vehicle aside from a very limited “contact us” link.

This series of meetings was actually co-opted by the Commissioners from a project known as the Briarcliff Coalition I independently initiated from the basis of my standing as a Past President of LaVista Park Civic Association. In the context of meetings with slightly less than two dozen various officers and interested parties from surrounding non-commercial interests in the area, we became alarmed. Realizing that things were moving behind the scenes and too fast for proper public consideration, we called a Public Meeting back in February, to which we invited the Commissioners, Planning, Public Works, Transportation and interested private parties. This movement was quickly usurped, and with the help of some back-room chicanery, was counterfeited in the form of the “Study.” The results are now in evidence.

Even more at the 11th hour than we were in February, it falls to us now to establish the kind of forum that would provide public access, including electronic media, such as a blog, that would allow all forms of commentary, opinion, and involvement to take their place and rise to the surface.

RESPONSE: 

_______

I truly appreciate your genuine concern for the current condition and potential futures of this area of DeKalb County, and your willingness to spend considerable personal time on this issue. However, I find your assertion that this is not an open process unsupportable. We have tried our best to make this an open process, but nobody is perfect, and there are limits to what we can do. Through meetings, surveys, websites, phone calls and emails, the project team has received, evaluated and acted on comments and questions. We cannot capture every comment of each meeting; nothing is captured verbatim – this is not a public hearing with a stenographer, but a public meeting, and the request for Mr. Fuqua to make this a two-way process and his response are documented on page 9 of the meeting notes. When we asked people to sign in and provide their contact information, we told them that the sole purpose was to allow us to communicate with them about the process. I will respect that promise. And I pledge to continue to uphold the integrity of this process, which I promise has been exceptional.

Jim Durrett

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/26

After attending the meeting on July 25 I am opposed to the development, or rather the scale of the development.
I agree that the projects at Edgewood and Atlantic Station have greatly improved those blighted areas, however our neighborhood is not blighted and the proposed development would dwarf the Edgewood improvement.
No matter how much the roads are improved, traffic is diverted, lanes are added, etc. this will not stop the existing traffic from continuing to drive down North Druid Hills or Briarcliff Roads to reach it’s destination. It may be diverted but will never cease, and will cause bottlenecks at adjoining intersections if diverted.
The response to the traffic questions always seemed to go back to the bike path/sidewalk/Marta answer. How many of the concerned neighbors who attended this meeting do you think could or would utilize these options?
Also I got the feeling that the infrastructure improvements must come first at the taxpayer expense so that the development may happen. If so, that is my biggest concern at this point and a huge hurdle to jump in the beginning.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for sharing your comments with us. We appreciate your comment about traffic — it is certainly true, as you point out, that a significant portion of the traffic that comes along North Druid Hills Road and Briarcliff Roads is regional in nature and will continue to exist, and will likely increase in the long run, whether or not the Sembler project happens. This regional issue is certainly serious, but unfortunately, our project is local in scope. We have tried to provide recommendations within that scope that will make as significant improvements as possible, but local solutions can not possibly address a regional issue.

The structure of a Tax Allocation District is designed to pay for public improvements without raising taxes. The bonds that are issued under the TAD are financed by the expected increase in real estate tax revenues that come from increased property values — the tax rate itself would not change. So, though it is true that it is funded by tax revenue, that revenue does not come from higher tax rates, and it ensures that an area that sees a rise in property values due to development also benefits by capturing the added value from that development.

Although this process was initiated due to concerns raised by Sembler’s announced plans, the Livable Communities Coalition hired us to make recommendations on improving the public realm, not to address the Sembler development. Our work has focused on the public realm issues we have seen in our work — not only traffic levels, but also the deficiency of accessible, usable parkland, the lack of provision for bikers and pedestrians, the environmental damage caused by the enormous quantities of impervious surfaces, the lack of convenient mass transit, the paucity of tree cover in commercial areas, and the unattractive nature of some of the main roads.

The proposals we have presented have tried to address those issues by creating and paying for a new public realm, as well as the shape that future development — whatever it may prove to be — should take around that public realm. We strongly believe that the quality of life in this part of DeKalb could be dramatically improved by the types of investments we have described in roads, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, mass transit, and parkland, and through the types of zoning principles we have described.

We do not work for the Sembler company, and we do not presume to offer an opinion on whether the Sembler development should or should not happen. We believe that the only people who can make that decision are your elected officials, with input from local residents such as yourself. We have simply tried to discuss and address the public realm, land use, and associated financial issues, that would be raised by the proposed Sembler development, the proposed Executive Park development, or any other development that may happen in this area in the future.

Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with us, and please contact us again if you have further questions, or if there are other issues you wish to discuss.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/26

My question is whether DeKalb County will commit the finances and infrastructure to maintain the proposed public realm improvements starting in year 26 and beyond.

By maintenance, I refer to the trimming of grass in the proposed boulevards, replacing dead trees along the streets, repainting bicycle lanes, and repairing broken sidewalks.

Thank you.

RESPONSE:
______,

Thank you for your question — it is a very important one. If our recommendations are implemented, then the Community Improvement District (CID) would be responsible for the maintenance you describe. Though the Tax Allocation District (TAD) would expire after 25 or 30 years (the legal maximum is 30), this would be used only for capital construction of new infrastructure. The maintenance would be covered by the CID, and that can continue for as long as the involved commercial property owners wish.

I hope this is clear. Please let me know if you have any further questions, or if there is anything I can clarify.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/26

Hi Alex,

Great presentation last night, I appreciate the bike trails and sidewalks and I look forward to the new road design being implemented. One question though, how will traffic be directed between the regional and local roads, and how will a motorist that is in the regional lanes move into the various businesses if they choose to do so?

Secondly, I am not a planner or an engineer by trade (I am a project manager), I do have interest in the planning area and would like to offer myself up if you need any input. I know it’s late, but just thought I would throw that out there.

Keep up the good work.

Regards,
______

RESPONSE:
_____,

Alex is traveling, but he asked me to respond to your e-mail on his behalf. First of all, thank you for your compliment — we’re very glad to have your support, and we’re glad that you liked what you saw. You raise a very good question about moving traffic between the regional lanes, local lanes, and businesses — we are in the middle of studying this and developing more specific proposals for how this would work. We will be presenting more detailed plans at the next public meeting.

We would love for you to be even more involved in this process. Commissioner Rader’s office has been coordinating local participation effort. I would recommend calling them at (404) 371-2863 — Debbie Schneider would be the best person to speak to. I am also cc-ing her on this message.

Thank you for taking the time to be involved in this process. It is your support, and the support of people like you, that will make it possible for these ideas to become realities. Please stay involved and share your enthusiasm with your neighbors.

Let us know if you have any other thoughts or questions you would like to share with us.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

FURTHER COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
Thanks for the reply Anthony.

Debbie, let me know if I can help in any way. I’m interested in this project succeeding.

Thanks,

________

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/26

Last night we were told there was a place for public comment on this website and that the comments from past meetings were here. Where are they? How do we enter them?

_____,

RESPONSE:
Thank you for your question. The way public comment has worked with this website is that people who have questions or comments about the project have written in just as you did, and we have responded as best we can, or have incorporated the information and sentiments in the comments into the work we have been doing.

In addition, the records of the meetings posted on the website include the questions and comments that people have made in the public meetings.

I hope this answers your question. Please let us know if you have additional comments or questions.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/26

I attended the July 25th meeting and, unlike the majority of the group in attendance, am thrilled by the idea of having true local access to up-to-date modern conveniences and public space. Although your plans are incomplete, they are a far cry better than what is there now. Thank you!!!

I live on Holly Lane in the Merry Hills sub division. When you made your presentation showing the various hiking trails for Kittredge Park, again, I was very excited to see that improvements to the existing access to the park next to the Gatchell Home was being proposed. But when you showed the proposed bike trails access from Merry Hills (Holly Lane) was missing along the same route.
Can you please add bike access to the park in your proposal from the area adjacent to the Gatchell Home as well as the hiking trail?

Thank you,
_________

RESPONSE:
Dear ____,

Thank you very much for the kind comments. Though the critics were certainly the loudest, we believe that there were many like you who, though not so vocal, are also excited by the idea of a more modern, usable public realm. We need your support!

You raise a very good point about connections from Merry Hills as well, and we will look at that in our plans. I think that probably there will need to be a master planning process for the park beyond the scope of this study, and that the specific issues of where bikers and walkers would go will need to be addressed at that stage.

In addition, Commissioners Rader and Gannon have brought together a neighborhood advisory committee to gather recommendations just like these to be incorporated into the plans. I believe a resident of Merry Hills, Deborah Edelson (I apologize if I am getting the name wrong) is on that committee. In addition, Flo Wolf has also been involved in sharing her thoughts and those of the neighborhood with us and with the Commissioners, and the Commissioners are always glad to receive input from the community.

We are very glad to have just this type of input, and we will do our best to address this issue as best we can.

If you think this process, and the recommendations coming out of it are worth supporting, please discuss it with your neighbors. We can only recommend what we think makes sense — if these proposals are to become realities in the long run, then it will depend on the support of people like you.

Thank you,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/27
I would like to participate in studies and surveys; I am an attorney with experience in planning and zoning. I am a resident of the Briarcliff Road corridor.

Thanks.

RESPONSE:
______,

Thank you for your offer — we’re always glad to have people participate!

I am cc-ing this message to Debbie Schneider, who works in Commissioner Rader’s office. She has been coordinating local community participation, and she can give you more information about ways you can be involved with the planning process.

We appreciate you taking the time to be involved. Please stay in touch and let us know if you have any further questions or thoughts you’d like to share.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/28
My name is ______. I am a native Atlantan, that has been a member of this community my entire 34 years of life, and I am also a member of the Atlanta Commercial Board of Realtors. I attended your meeting last week, and was not surprised to see so many people opposed to your efforts to change one of Atlanta’s best places to live. I have seen you all change areas in desperate need, but I’m not clear why you would go after this area specifically. First, where you all say you have not come up with traffic numbers yet, I know better.
 You can pull those up in a matter of minutes on CoStar. The biggest concern I have is that you claim you can improve traffic, but you do not propose anything that makes sense that will improve traffic. Unfortunantly, mass transit was poorly planned for Atlanta, and we are not an area that is likely to fit the bill for a new mass transit system now that Atlanta is already so big and developed as it is. Its simply not possible to make one that would be effective here, mostly because everything is to spread out, and there would be far to many stops to get all the way accross the city. As mentioned in the meeting, more land use always results in more traffic, and we will have even more cars congesting the area, polluting the air if you bring more use to these areas. The only way I can imagine you could improve traffic is if you were to dig a Briarcliff rd. tunnel that runs underneath N. Druid Hills rd. in order that traffic can continue its flow without stopping. There is still space to make that happen if DOT will allow that intersection to be closed while under development. The Lohemans plaza parking lot, the closed CROWN gas station, and the condemned church could all be taken by eminent domain to make that work.
While you propose extra sidewalk space, a lane of trees, and even exta space for slow moving buses at roadside, I have to wonder where you are magically going to fit that. You would have to tear out some existing established businesses in order to widen the roads and make all of that fit. The given space is congested enough while there are two lanes of traffic going in each direction. If you reduce that to one lane, cars will sit twice as long, kind of like they do on Briarcliff Rd between N. Druid Hills Rd. and Lavista Rd.
now, causing a terrible smog everyday, preventing anyone from wanting to ride a bike in the first place. I know wide sidewalks can be beaufitul, especially with a park view, and I commend you all for those you have developed elsewhere thus far, but this is Atlanta. Its hot and sticky all the time, and that means most people don’t want to go for a walk or bikeride outside. I invite you to visit the neighborhood gyms and interview people there to see if they would run/walk/ride outside instead given a place to do it. Or, one better, take a walk through Emory park, just down the street, or the other park right on Houston Mill Rd, and see how many joggers there are. The fact is, people here prefer their air controlled gyms. I’m very surprised at your decision to change this neighborhood. There are so many better candidates in the general area that would really benefit from your work. Consider the area at the corner of Briarcliff Rd and Clairmont Rd or the stretch of Buford Hwy lying between N.
Druid Hills Rd. and Clairmont Rd. -Those are desperately in need of revitalizing! You could do bigger and better things elsewhere if you do some research. The part of Buford Hwy. I’m speaking of could be an extension of all the great things happening in Brookhaven, a continued growth for Lenox and Buckhead, and if that area were given revitalization first, more people would move there, traffic may change directions some, thereby making it more conceivable to work on our area afterward. Finally, I just want to say, if you are ademently going to develop our area, why not work on the roads first, and show us how you would improve traffic. If you really come up with a way to benefit traffic, you may not be as opposed to the neighbors.

RESPONSE:
Dear _____,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.

I think I should start by emphasizing a distinction that has been
confusing to many people. Alex Garvin & Associates is not part of the
Sembler Company, we do not represent them, and our work in DeKalb has
not been with the purpose of either advocating or opposing their
development. We were hired by the Livable Communities Coalition, at the
request of Commissioners Rader and Gannon, to conduct a public planning
process that would result in a series of recommendations to improve the
public realm in the study area. This planning process was initiated to
create a framework for any future development in this part of DeKalb,
whether by Sembler, Executive Park, or anybody else.

Your comment about tunneling Briarcliff Road under North Druid Hills
Road raises an interesting issue we have faced in this study, namely the
issue of moving traffic versus creating a place. We have been examining
ways of grade-separating the roads from one another. However, the risk
one runs is that the intersection could end up as essentially a highway
interchange. A highway interchange at that intersection might very well
move more traffic. However, since the beginning of this process, we have
argued that these roads should be considered as more than just traffic
conduits. Leaving aside the issue of cost, turning that intersection
into a highway interchange would certainly make it a less attractive
place to spend time, and would ensure that it would be occupied by
nobody but cars.

The emphasis on motor vehicles to the exclusion of people has been the
guiding philosophy of a great many road improvements in Atlanta as well
as the rest of the country, and we believe that it has often created a
public realm that is barren and hostile to bikers, walkers, and anybody
else not in a motor vehicle. How effective it has been at ensuring that
traffic flow is safe, convenient, and efficient varies.

Our work has focused on the public realm — the streets, sidewalks, bike
lanes, parks and other open, publicly accessible spaces. Our impression
that these parts of the public realm were deficient was powerfully
reinforced by the response to a survey we conducted early in this
process, where a great number of respondents said that they did not walk
or bike, not because they didn’t want to, but because they didn’t feel
safe doing so.

The boulevard that we have proposed seeks to strike a balance between
these competing issues. The reconfigured boulevard would contain seven
lanes for moving traffic rather than the current five on the existing
roads, and we believe that separating regional traffic from local
traffic would make traffic move more smoothly. But the boulevard would
also provide a public realm with places to walk and bike, and with trees
to provide shade and make the street more attractive. You are certainly
right that this would require additional land, and we are examining what
properties this might affect, and the costs of acquisition. We will
provide greater detail on this in the next meeting. But we believe that
acquisition for a project like the boulevard, which serves a number of
different users, would provide benefits to local residents that would
make it worthwhile.

Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with us, and please
contact us again if you have further questions, or if there are other
issues you wish to discuss. We appreciate you taking the time to be
involved in this planning process.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
7/30
I was curious if your study has looked at the impact of the development on surrounding property values. I own a house on High Haven Court, which is just a stone’s throw from the eastern edge of the study area, and wanted to kno what your expectations are? On one hand, i think it could be a great bump up, on the other, i think it could flood the real estate market while creating tremendous amounts of traffic. have you addressed this issue in any way?

RESPONSE:
_____,

Thank you for your question. In our first presentation, “Guiding Principles,” we discussed the impact that public realm improvements can have on neighboring property values, and we argued that significant improvements to the public realm can have a dramatic, positive impact on adjacent property values. We believe that if the types of improvements we are proposing were implemented — boulevards with street trees, renovated parks with improved access, sidewalks, protected bike lanes, and so forth — that they would make the study area and its surroundings a much more attractive, desirable place to live, and property values would go up. (The presentation, and accompanying notes, are posted on the website — scroll down to Public Presentation I: Guiding Principles.)

If you are wondering about the impact of the proposed Sembler development, or any of the other developments, that is something that is more difficult to answer. Sembler has publicly stated that property values surrounding their other developments have gone up — we don’t have the information to confirm or dispute that, but Sembler may be able to provide that.

Speaking generally, I think it is fair to say that what happens to property values will depend on how quality of life in this area is affected. We argue that improvements to the public realm such as those we have proposed would improve the quality of life by creating a public realm that is a framework for people who live around it — certainly turning North Druid Hills Road into a boulevard, for example, would make it a much more desirable place to live, work, and so forth.

The test with any of the proposed developments will be the effect they have on the public realm. If they make improvements along the lines of what we have suggested (or something we haven’t thought of), then I would expect that it would improve quality of life, and property values would rise. If, as some people have worried, they flood the area with traffic and make life unpleasant, then it might make this area less desirable. Our purpose in conducting this study, and part of the purpose of the DRI process including the traffic study, is to ensure that new development improves quality of life, rather than damaging it.

I hope this answers your question. Please let us know if you have any further questions or thoughts you would like to share with us. Thank you for taking the time to be involved.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
8/7
I would like to suggest that at the next meeting you do 2 things. One is “cut to the chase” and don’t waste so much time on introductions and thank-yous. The second is that you explain the “worst case scenario”–what can (and probably
will) happen if some kind of planning is not done. I understand that many parcels in the area can and will be re-developed in ways that will adversely affect traffic without any additional permission or zoning changes. I think it is important that people understand that change IS coming, the only question being how the neighborhood can influence that change. I’d suggest you hand out a sketch of the area showing, for example, Executive Park with 5 story buildings and projecting the increase in traffic that would result from that. Please contact me if you don’t get my point. See you at the meeting in August.

RESPONSE:
____,
 
Thank you for the e-mail.
 
Your suggestion about the “worst case scenario” is very interesting. I agree — change of some sort is coming to this area, and the question is what kind of change. Making this point to people has been difficult. We had looked at making a visual, “worst-case” presentation of the kind that you mention for an earlier meeting and we had run into several difficulties with it. First, projected full build-out with a site like Executive Park is almost impossible without designing a site plan. The difficulty is that, though the site can theoretically hold millions of square feet of office space, it would also require tens of thousands of parking spaces, and then a whole network of driveways to move the cars around, and we couldn’t accurately estimate the capacity without figuring out a details circulation system, and that would have been weeks of work. In addition, though Executive Park can theoretically build millions of square feet of office space, there is no market for that amount of office space, and we felt that it wouldn’t be forthright to suggest that that level and type of development would be coming.
 
In addition, the current zoning doesn’t fully reflect the probable build-out because, as Commissioner Rader has mentioned, the property owner could reasonably claim that the zoning is not comparable to comparable property, and, if the county refuses to rezone, go to court to protest. We could only speculate at what would come out of such a case.
 
In the end, we have refrained from making a “worst case” drawing because we don’t feel like we can do it accurately. Also, at this point, we feel that we have so much material in the way of specific proposals that we think it makes sense to focus our time on that. But if you have other suggestions about how to make this point — and it is an important point, and difficult to make — we would love to hear them.
 
Thank you for taking the time to be involved with this process and to share your thoughts. Please let us know if you have other ideas, or if you have questions.
 
Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

FURTHER COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
Thank you for your response to my e-mail.
 
Perhaps “worst case scenario” was too drastic a suggestion. How about just a possible scenario, not too detailed, about the impact to the area if Executive Park, for example, rebuilt all existing structures to 5 stories? I had the impression from our neighborhhood association people that Executive Park (and other “property owners” ) are presently in the position of making this kind of change without any further permission from the county or zoning changes or traffic studies. If this is true and they do it, surely the area will suffer significantly more traffic congestion. All I want to communicate to people is that other “property owners” already have the power to change this area for the worse, so instead of thinking we can stop change we should re-focus on ways to direct it.
 
By the way, at the meeting I attended there seemed to be some confusion about the term “property owners.” Most of us who live around here think that means us, the small individual home owners, as oppsosed to what you refer to as “property owners” but we think of as “developers,” the people who own Executive Park etc.
 
If Mr. Garvin were prepared to discuss the issue I raised, I could turn in a pre-written question about it so people wouldn’t think presenting such a scenario was a threat that “if you don’t go along with what we suggest, you’ll be sorry.”
 
Thanks,
_______

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
8/21
Hi.  I don’t recall hearing whether a study was ever done to determine whether
this area can sustain the types and scope of residential and commercial
buildings proposed specifically by the Sembler Company.  There are already some
vacant storefronts in this area, and I fear that with the proposed dense
development, there will be many more.  A new mall in this area will surely take
customers away from both of the already floundering Northlake and North DeKalb
malls. Can you please address my concerns?

RESPONSE:
_____,

That’s an excellent question you raise. We have looked at general market and demographic data for this area, and we can tell you that both population and income levels are rising. That would suggest, generally speaking, that the area is ripe for new retail development. However, we have not done the type of in-depth retail market analysis that one would need to do if one were considering building new retail space — we consider that the responsibility of the Sembler Company, Executive Park, or anybody else who is contemplating entering the retail market. We assume that they have done these studies for internal purposes. If they do not do their due diligence and their development fails, that is part of the risk they run.

You also ask about taking business away from existing shopping centers. Stores and retail centers commonly compete with each other to attract customers, and unsuccessful stores and centers do often lose business, or even go under — that, too, is part of the risk of competing in the market, and it is their responsibility to offer the goods and shopping experience that customers demand. This only becomes a question of public policy, in our opinion, where the government is contemplating a subsidy for a retail property — it is unfair to subsidize one competitor and not another, and it makes no sense to spend money to subsidize new retail space when there isn’t a market for it. However, we are not recommending any subsidy for any of the developers, and we do not know of any subsidy being proposed. The money from the TAD that we are proposing would be used to pay for public amenities, such as park improvements, new roads, bicycle lanes, and so forth.

It might also be a significant public policy question if the vacancy rates were so prolific as to blight the area and deprive it of a tax base and important services. Given the strength of local real estate activity — Marvin Isenberg’s plan for new stores at the corner of the North Druid Hills Road and Briarcliff Road intersection, or the fact that Loehmann’s Plaza has just brought in new retailers and is now fully rented — that, too, seems unlikely. What seems more likely is that underperforming retail properties would be redeveloped, either to bring in new retailers, or as some other, more profitable land use (such as housing).

I know this is a long answer to your brief question, but it’s an important and complicated topic you raise, and I didn’t want to give it short shrift.

I hope this answers your question. If you have further thoughts about this, or if there’s something else you’d like to discuss, please let me know and we’ll do our best to respond.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/4
I appreciate the opportunity you have provided with these forums.  I’m excited
about what this plan presents and the development of the area.  I realize the
that whole community may not feel this way, but I’m looking forward to seeing
these changes come to fruition.  Thank you for your efforts.

RESPONSE:
_____,
Thank you for the kind remarks — it’s great to have your support. It’s been exciting to work on this project, and we think the possibilities for positive change in this area are enormous. We hope that you and people who feel as you do will push for the kinds of improvements you want to see. We also hope we’ll see you at this Thursday’s meeting.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/4
Did anyone ever sugggest remodeling Adams Stadium as a new venue for
performances,community sports events, even a park like atmosphere?  This could
be a good draw for the neighborhood to get behind it a bit more.

RESPONSE:
______,

Thank you for sharing your very interesting suggestion with us. Remodeling Adams Stadium could certainly make it a more valuable asset to the neighborhood, and to DeKalb County. The persistent difficulty with Adams Stadium has been that it is the property of the DeKalb School Board, and the School Board has indicated that they are interested in selling that property, rather than remodeling it for other public uses. (Though I should note that I haven’t yet heard of a sale going through yet, only negotiations.) We and others, including Commissioners Rader and Gannon, have tried to encourage the School Board to participate in this planning process, but so far, they have not been active participants.

If they do in fact sell the property to the Sembler Company, then the Sembler Company has made it clear that they intend to develop that property with shops, apartments, and the offices, and they do not intend to keep the stadium. Though I cannot speak for Sembler, I suspect that they do not believe they can fit the level of development they propose onto the property while keeping the stadium.

If you are concerned about the fate of the stadium, we encourage you to tell your local school board representative how you feel about the matter, and encourage them to act accordingly.

Thank you for being involved with this process and taking the time to share your thoughts. We hope we will see you at the public presentation tomorrow night at 7 PM.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/4
Will be at the Sept 6 meeting. Garvin & Assoc’s plan is great but let’s be
realistic, the proposed infrastructure improvements will not happen in our
lifetime and who want’s to go through the grief that this large a project will
bring to the area. Atlanta is already on the verge of a condo and retail glut.

Can we please ask neighbors who wish to speak to limit their comments/questions
to a specified time limit? At the last meeting people tended to ramble on for
great length’s of time. Thank you.

RESPONSE:

______,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns with us. We are glad that you think the plan is great, and we do believe that the proposed infrastructure improvements can happen, and promptly. We believe this, first of all, because the TAD would provide a stream of revenue that would not be subjected to the slow vagaries of the county budgeting process. Second, Commissioner Rader has made it clear that the approval of a TAD would have to precede any rezoning, which means that infrastructure funding would be available at the same time as, if not before, any development.

The moderators have tried to encourage people to limit the length of their comments and questions, and we will try to do our best at the coming meeting to get speakers to be succinct, but, as you know, it’s easier said than done.

Thank you for being involved with this process. We hope you will come to tomorrow night’s meeting at 7 PM.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/7

I filled out the questionaire and returned it regarding the development at Briarcliff and N. Druid Hills Rd.  At first, I was not opposed to it if the infrastructure could be improved to handle the inevitable increase in traffic as well as stormwater runoff, and utilities.  I was unaware at that time, that Executive Park was also planned for development as part of this package. I see that they have installed devices to monitor traffic volumes, so I know that the information from that will be assessed when considering the rezoning and permit for development. 

Having no children of my own, the school situation didn’t exactly figure into my evaluation of what would be good for this community.  The overcrowding of schools can only be exacerbated if the school property is sold.  Does that mean that our taxes will be increased to make up for the county’s need to build more schools?  I already resent the chunk of money that I have to pay to support schools, since I derive no direct benefit from them.  The point that someone made about having to purchase land in an area where property is quite expensive already in order to build schools to replace those taken is a good one.

I am absolutely opposed to any development that would increase my already excessive property taxes and I am very concerned about the traffic increase in the area.  I am not confident that the county will do the right thing for our community given the inevitable influx of revenue that this development would provide.

If I were to wager on this, I would say the development is bound to happen.  I can only hope that it increases the potential of my property for sale so that I can get out of Dekalb County.  I have lived in this area for about 20 years and would really like to stay.

Sincerely,
________

RESPONSE:
Dear _________,

Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts with us.

First of all, you are correct about the traffic measurements — traffic studies are being conducted as part of the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, under the direction of the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA). The developer must demonstrate that traffic will be at an acceptable level of service for the project to be approved.

In regards to the sale of the school property, we were brought in after negotiations were already under way between the school board and Sembler, and the school board has not been eager to participate in the planning process. Commissioners Rader and Gannon have no control over whether or not the school sells its property. As Commissioner Rader explained at the last meeting, part of the purpose of this study is to determine, if the school board does sell it to a developer, what development that property can handle. If you are concerned about the school board’s impending decision on whether or not to sell the property, we urge you to contact your school board representative and make your views known.

The purpose of the Tax Allocation District (TAD) we have proposed is to make sure that your property taxes do not go up, and that the infrastructure payments can be paid for. The TAD generates its revenue from future increases in property tax revenue generated by development (not from a higher tax rate). Once the boundaries of a TAD are drawn, all the TAD money must be invested within those boundaries. They cannot be spent elsewhere in the county.

The hope of our proposals for the public is that they will improve the quality of life in this area, through parkland, trees, sidewalks, a bicycle network, boulevards, and so forth. If that is the case, we believe that the area would become more desirable, and that property values would go up. And would certainly hope that you could stay and enjoy this neighborhood for as long as you would like.

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this process. If you have any other questions or comments, please don’t hesitate to share them with us.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/7

After the meeting last night I am moved to contact Mr. Gavin and Mr. Fuqua.
First I would like to say that I am for the development of the Briarcliff property. I live at Executive Park Condo so the improvements will be appreciated. Yes we are concerned about how it will effect our property but we are hoping that we will prosper from it in many ways.
Also, I would like to say that in many ways I was and am embarrassed by the comments that have been made at the meetings that I have attended. The schools in question have been in need of major repairs for many years. I went to Briarcliff high school in 1966 so I can speak with knowledge that the property has not changed since then. The stadium needed repairs when my girls were in high school back in the 90’s. When it was built the parking was difficult.
Thank you again for what you are trying to bring to our community.
I would like to help you all in anyway that I can.
Thanks
______

RESPONSE:
Dear ______,

Thank you for sending us your thoughts. I have forwarded your e-mail to Mr. Fuqua as well.

We hope you will stay involved in this process as it moves forward. We think it is important that all voices make themselves heard to ensure that decisions are made in a balanced and considered way. Whatever the school board ultimately decides to do with the property, it will be important for people to raise the issues you raise.

If you would like to help with the process, we recommend you contact Commissioner Rader’s office at (404) 371-2863 and speak with Debbie Schneider, or the Livable Communities Coalition at 404.214.0081 and speak with Jim Durrett.

Thank you for taking the time to be involved.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/18

I am completely for the redevelopment of the area. There are a lot of ugly, old, empty buildings that need to go.  I am happy the corner where the church and empty gas station was demolished and will be developed, however I have a big big problem with the 3 large trees being taken down.  Why was that allowed? Who allowed it?  How can I make my voice heard on that subject and who should I voice it to?

RESPONSE:
__________,

Thank you for writing to us and sharing your thoughts.

We don’t fully know the circumstances of why those trees were taken down — Commissioners Rader and Gannon are investigating to see if the property owner was in fact allowed to cut down those trees according to a zoning agreement with the county. Their offices could probably give you more information about what they have found, and they would be a good place to express your displeasure.
Commissioner Rader’s office: (404) 371-2863 Commissioner Gannon’s office: (404) 371-4909

For our part, we were very upset to see that those trees had been cut down — they were beautiful trees, and we had been planning to incorporate them into the boulevard.

Please let us know if you have any other comments or questions to share with us.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMUNITY E-MAIL:
9/25

I am a representative from the Unitarian Univeralist Congregation of Atlanta located at the intersection of the I-85 access road and Cliff Valley Way.

We have heard that the plan may include a new interstate exit that runs through our property.  I have not been able to find information to either confirm nor deny this.  Definitive information would be helpful for us to take a stance on the plan and prepare for its eventualities.

Firstly, could you precisely describe any new proposed interstate exits, preferrably with maps?

And secondly, when will a final plan document be released so that we can accurately ascertain the content of proposed changes and possible impacts to our church property?

Thank you very much.

RESPONSE:
Mr. ______,

Thank you for your question. The only changes we are proposing in the immediate vicinity of your church are to make the I-85 access road a two-way street, which would make a left-hand turn possible from Cliff Valley Way, and to build sidewalks for the entire length of Cliff Valley Way. Neither should require the taking of any of your church property, or have any effect upon it except to allow more convenient access.

For a complete set of images of what we are proposing, please look at the public presentations on this website, www.briarcliffnorthdruidhills.org. The most recent public presentation, “Greening DeKalb,” has the most up-to-date proposals. The record of the meeting should hopefully offer a fairly clear description of what we are proposing, but if you have any questions, please let us know.

We are working right now on our final report for this project, which we expect to print and release in the next few weeks. The final version will be printed and distributed, and a pdf version will be published on the project website.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,
Anthony Weiss