real estate

[Renderings] 82,000-square-foot retail project near Emory to break ground in June

0 32 0 shares    

[Renderings] 82,000-square-foot retail project near Emory to break ground in June

Emory Point mixed-use development to boast 440 apartments and 82,000 square feet of retail

emory point aerial rendering ~ what now, atlanta?

UPDATE (July 19, 2011): Construction begins on $250 million Emory Point

Cousins Properties Inc. and Gables Residential will break ground on Emory Point in June, according to Larry Gellerstedt, Cousins Properties' chief executive officer. Gellerstedt recently discussed the mixed-use development during the Bisnow Atlanta's "State of the Market" event.

Plans for the project on Clifton Road near Emory University were introduced in 2008, but it was delayed due to the economy.

Officials hope the development will house several local restaurants and boutiques. There is 82,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space (22 units), according to the development's retail leasing map.

emory point retail leasing map ~ what now, atlanta?
Emory Point retail leasing map

Cousins Properties is leading the development of Emory Point with Gables Residential developing the apartment homes, 440 in total.

emory point rendering ~ what now, atlanta?

For more information on the development, check out the Emory Point Brochure.

Caleb J. Spivak
Caleb Spivak

Caleb J. Spivak (CJS) is the Founder of What Now Atlanta (WNA). He was featured in The New York Times, Creative Loafing's "20 People to Watch," named "Lifestyle Blogger You Need To Know" by Rolling Out Magazine and highlighted as Atlanta's Metropolitan Male in fashion magazine, 944. WNA has been named "Best of Atlanta" by Creative Loafing, and Atlanta and Jezebel Magazines.

32 responses to “[Renderings] 82,000-square-foot retail project near Emory to break ground in June

  1. They better have tenants already lined up for their retail or it'll end up like Atlantic Station, Town Center in Brokehaven, Lindbergh Center, Streets of Buckhead, and all the other "city center" developments on steroids. Hasn't anybody heard? Mixed-Use is SO 3 years ago. Nonetheless, I hope it does well as long as it's given adequate and affordable parking.

  2. Really Randy?? "...end up like Atlantic Station..Town Center.." Those projects are 10 times the size and scope of this development. Additionally, those projects will fair well in the long term. Reminder, they came on the market in the worst retail market since the great depression. Forum on Peachtree Parkway, Vinings Jubilee and several other "Mixed-Use" projects are doing just fine....Mixed-Use or Power Center..hmmm...

  3. Randy H.'s statement that "mixed-use is SO 3 years ago" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Randy, ever indication is that giant suburbs and disappearing, and everyone is looking for in-town living. To me, it appears that this development: (a) smartly tuck parking away in a deck (not strip mall style); (b) includes apartments and amenitiies for a HUGE employer directly across the street; and (c) not disproportionate in size to its surroundings. Could be a lot worse...

  4. Randy's statement, while not entirely correct, has a lot more support than the statement "giant suburbs are disappearing, and everyone is looking for in-town living". I posted a stat yesterday that showed that the CITY of Atlanta has added approximately 3,500 residents in the past 10 years...less than 1 person per day, while the greater metro Atlanta area (the suburbs) has added over 1.6mm people. Hardly a mass migration into the city...

    I see this development as being moderately more successful than Atlantic Station, Town Center Brookhaven, Lindbergh, etc. because (i) the scope is smaller, and (ii) they are surrounded by a decent demographic (wealthy students, and some relatively high-end residential). Now, Town Brookhaven is surrounded by a young, and somewhat well-to-do demographic, but it's also huge, and, as discussed on a previous thread, will probably do ok in the short-medium term, because of the psychology of Brookhaven residents.

    Mixed Use is not "so 3 years ago"..mixed-use is one of the essential tenets of successful urban development. Master planned "city-center" developments are what were, and clearly still are, big themes amongst Atlanta's city planners. They're also incredibly destructive to the urban fabric of the city that they're in. Atlanta doesn't get this. It's city officials don't get it, and the developers are typically either merchant builders, or short term holders, and therefore make money dumping off a poorly conceived (put polished) project on somebody else just as the bottom starts to fall out. The Forum on Peachtree Parkway has fared will because it's the only thing around for miles; it's a destination spot where all the lifeless subrubanites can go and get crappy mexican food and shop at Banana Republic. Put that same development in the city where there are (i) people that value individuality, creativity, and innovation, and (ii) other options that cater to that, and it would fail miserably.

  5. It's interesting that the AJC lists a train from Lindbergh to Emory as one of the potential transit projects. Is there enough demand for that?

  6. Urbanist... there are several issues with your census post.

    1. The Census Bureau themselves estimated the city is over 500,000. It's clear that there was a large undercount and we are not the only city with this issue. Although NYC grew some, they are claiming they are 200,000 short from estimates and Chicago actually lost population (over 200,000 people).

    The population is probably not as high as the original estimates, but it's definitely more than a gain of 3,000 people. The areas that saw population decreases in the city were in South Atlanta in poor, majority black neighorhoods. Many housing projects have been torn down in the city in the last 10 years. Midtown, Inman Park, Virginia Highlands and all the other desirable areas increased in population.

    2. Although the census shows we haven't grown much, the type of people that now live in the city are very different from 10 years ago. The city is less black and less poor. Over 30,000 black people left and over 20,000 white people have moved in. There's also been an increase in the hispanic and asian population within the city, and like I said, a huge decrease in the black population.

  7. Randy H.

    By your standard, Atlanta sprawl was sooo 15 years ago. Take a look at all of the empty spaces and in some cases, completely abandoned strip centers around. There is one on Pleasant Hill Rd that has been that way for YEARS. What your silly post ignores is the global recession from which we clearly have not recovered.

  8. I wonder how much the statistics were skewed by the incorporation of some of the edge cities as well taking some of the Atlanta population with them.

  9. The edge cities that incorporated (Sandy Springs, Dunwoody, etc.) were never part of Atlanta to begin with. People in Sandy Springs had an Atlanta address because they were in unincorporated Fulton County and for mailing purposes, it's the closest/largest city/town which was Atlanta. Sandy Springs was never designated for census purposes as Atlanta, only for mailing purposes... so it had nothing to do with the under count of the city population.

  10. Mike, can you provide a link to verify the census estimates of 500,000+ population. I'm pretty sure I saw their data yesterday, an it said 420,000. Also, removing the poor and the black from the city isn't something to be proud of. Cities aren't meant to be places for the wealthy. On the contrary, cities are supposed to be a huge melting pot of poor, middle income, and wealthy. Mature cities like NYC and Paris are definitively wealthy cities, but they've become that way over hundreds of years of success, development, and growth as global cities. As they've pushed the poorer demographics out to Brooklyn, Queens, etc. they've still made sure to keep them connected to the city. Just because they can't afford to live there doesn't mean they're not valuable. What would be impressive is if you said, the city tore down tons of lower income housing, because they were able to relocate those poor closer to the city in affordable apartments. The point I take from the minimal population growth that our "city" has seen over the past 10 years (perhaps longer) is that the focus and policy of actually doing positive things for the city is constanty trumped or overwhelmed by political bullshit that paves the way for these massive, master planned, consistently failing/underperforming community centers. It's an advertising campaign at the expense of everyone who wants a real city.

  11. "Cities aren’t meant to be places for the wealthy"
    True, but have you noticed how much nicer Memorial Drive is now that Capitol Homes is gone 🙂

  12. Urbanist, I said census ESTIMATES. ESTIMATES. Not the actual 2010 census. They ESTIMATED the population to be 540,000, but recent OFFICIAL 2010 census results put the city at 420,003.

    As to the rest of your post, whatever dude. You have some serious issues.

  13. @Mike - Ok, so the number that I posted - the gain of 3,500 people in 10 years - was accurate, and your "estimate" was wrong by over 20%, but you said there were issues with my post. Care to elaborate on the "issues"? I'd also be curious to know what issues you think somebody has, because they want to see their city developed into a better place, rather than ccontinually picked apart by bad policy. I'm looking forward to what will surely be a really bright response.

  14. Urbanist... The Census Bureau releases estimates every year for cities and counties. It was The Census Bureau themselves that estimated Atlanta's city population to be 540,000 in 2009. Here, take a look, straight from the US Census website (Atlanta is #33 on the list with a population estimated at 540,922 in 2009):

    The official results by The Census Bureau in 2010 show that their OWN estimates were significantly wrong OR there was an undercount since they report the population as 420,003. It's also clear that more than 3,500 people moved into the city because if you break it down by race (and I am rounding here), together well over 30,000 non-black people (white, asian, hispanic) moved into the city limits while over 30,000 black people moved out in mostly poor areas in the southern part of the city.

    It is very possible there was an undercount - several people complained they never got the form in the mail to begin with and Atlanta had a low return rate. Other cities are having this issue as well. Here is another article for you:

    For someone like you so interested in urban development, I'm surprised you don't keep track of population statistics in the city you love to be so insanely critical of. At least know what you're talking about first...

  15. Mike, you clearly don't get it. I don't care what the census bureau estimated. What I care about is what actually happened. What actually happened is the city of Atlanta added just over 3,500 people over the course of 10 years. During that same time period, the census bureau miscalculated, and wound up overshooting their estimated population for the city by over 20%. The fact that the census ESTIMATED 540,000 people and got it terribly wrong doesn't validate anything.

    I also don't care about total migration into the city. Net migration is what counts. Without MORE people, you don't grow and develop. Just supplanting blacks with whites isn't a good thing. Maybe you think it is, but it's not. I'm interested in an economically and socially diverse community, not a city with small clusters of well to do white people.

    I'm well aware of the speculation that the census under-counted in a lot of metro areas. However, as of right now, the facts show that just over 3,500 people were added to the cities population over the course of 10 years. If the census did in fact under-count, and that number is higher, then when they come to that conclusion, I may have a different opinion. However, as it stands, there have been 3,500 people added to the city in 10 years. That's a fact, and it's pathetic.

    Removing your head from dark areas, and learning how to dinstinguish facts from incorrect estimates and speculation might do you some good. If I had to guess, I'd bet you're a broker...

  16. What do you mean "I don't get it"? I do GET IT, I'm just not as negative as you. You were claiming I made those estimates up when I didn't - they came from the US Census Bureau.

    And no, I'm not a broker. I don't even have a real estate license. I'm also not from Atlanta - I'm from NYC and now I live in Atlanta... so you don't need to school me on NYC, thanks.

  17. I also take issue with this comment:

    "Just supplanting blacks with whites isn’t a good thing. Maybe you think it is, but it’s not. I’m interested in an economically and socially diverse community, not a city with small clusters of well to do white people."

    Atlanta for a long time now has been a majority black city with little diversity. Although the net is only 3,500 people (which I'm sorry is very hard to believe - it may not be 100,000 like estimated but 3,500 is way too low), this census proves that the city is becoming more diverse. Whites, HISPANICS, AND ASIANS (did you forget about them?) have all increased in the city. It's not just black and white - there are other races too as I'm sure you are aware so your statement about Atlanta not becoming a diverse community with only small clusters of well to do white people is false.

    A lot of NYC used to be a dump in the 80's and many areas have turned around - look at how great it is now. Atlanta isn't going to benefit from having a bunch of run down poor neighborhoods that have potential to be so much more just so we can have a higher population. I believe that the city can do more to encourage affordable housing though.

    The parts of the city being abandoned by poor blacks (like South and West Atlanta) are old, urban, and have great bones. If other people start moving into these areas in the future and fix them up, that's a good thing as these neighborhoods that already exist can become more dense, diverse, vibrant, and healthier. And this is a bad thing???

  18. Great for Emory, bad for the already congested Clifton Briarcliff and surrounding roads. Duh, I forgot, build first then worry about infrastructure later.

  19. Mike,

    I think you've confused yourself. You were the one who made the comment, "well over 30,000 non-black people (white, asian, hispanic) moved into the city limits while over 30,000 black people moved out in mostly poor areas in the southern part of the city", to support the fact that more than 3500 people moved into the city. I simply followed up to say that this wasn't a good thing - moving poor (and in this case black) people out of the city in lieu of wealthier residents. And if you think Atlanta is such a "diverse" city, let me give you a few statistics from 2010 Claritas:

    1 mile radius from zip code 30309 (basically the heart of midtown): 74.47% white
    1 mile radius from zip code 30303 (basically the heart of downtown):
    23% white, 66% black

    The statistics get even more skewed, and more segregated the further away you get from the core of Atlanta. The fact is that Atlanta is a heavily segregated city. Diversity doesn't mean that the overall population has a certain mix of whites, blacks, asians, etc. Diverse means that there is a more equal percentage of various racial/religious/etc. groups that are all part of the same area. The city of Atlanta should have overcome this by now. However, instead of working to integrate the people of the city together into central areas, they've pushed them apart. They've allowed big developers to come in and develop huge master planned communities in blighted areas (Lindbergh, Atlantic Station, the Gulch), pushing out the existing residents to make way for those that can afford to live/play in the new developments. Then, they grandstand like they've done something good for the city, when they've done just the opposite. I'm not saying new development isn't a positive thing, because it is. However, building your way to prosperity doesn't work. For some reason, even after multiple failed attempts, Atlanta doesn't get this.

  20. And Urbanist, I'm from NYC. You want to talk about segregated??? Is NYC not a "real city" now? The NYC metro area is even more segregated, with many towns being 98% white and 0% black. Just because you see a bunch of different people walking around in Manhattan doesn't mean they all live around each other. And Chicago? That is one of the most segregated cities in the country.

    But anyways, you keep twisting my words. Maybe you have poor reading comprehension? I don't know. I said this census proves Atlanta AS A WHOLE (the entire population of the city) is becoming more diverse. Now you are breaking it down by each area and saying it is segregated. The fact is black population is down, and white, hispanic, and asian is up. That equals more diversity compared to being a majority black city with some white people here and there. If anyone is confused, it is you.

  21. Mike, you've mentioned that you're from NYC at least 3 times now. I get it. You seem like one of those guys who did an internship there 5 years ago, and now believe you're the local expert on all things NYC. But guess what, I currently live there (well, back and forth between there and Atlanta), and I've lived there for the past several years. If you thought the "I used to live in NYC" was a trump card of some sort, you're wrong. Now, to get back to your consistently incorrect claims...

    First, the NYC metro area is segregated, you're right. It's too bad we're not talking about metro areas though. We're talking about the "city" of Atlanta. The "city" of New York is full of an incredibly diverse mix of people, all living, working, and socializing together on a daily basis. Furthermore, they're all doing it in a centralized city. There are little nieghborhoods of demographic concentrations, but they're all connected to the rest of the city by foot, bus, cab, and train. Can you tell me where Chinatown is in the CITY of Atlanta? How about Little Italy? Is there a Korea town? Even if you could find these neighborhoods in the CITY of Atlanta, you surely couldn't tell me that they were well connected to the rest of the city.

    I understand perfectly well what you're telling me. What you don't seem to get is that what you're telling me has the depth of an argument from a child. What good does it to if the city is getting more diverse "as a whole" if none of those people are connecting with each other. If there was some sort of barrier around Chinatown in NYC, that discouraged that population from interacting with the rest of the city, and discouraged the rest of the city from interacting with that population, what good does their input of diversity do?

    That's what is wrong with Atlanta (I think this is now the third time I've said this). The city of Atlanta promotes development that draws resources away from the actual city, spreading them out horizontally, and creating artificial or real barriers between neighborhoods. Atlantic Station was a huge master-planned development that made for a lot of great photo ops for developers and city politicians. It sits, disconnected from the rest of the city, on the other side of the connector, where it has slipped in and out of foreclosure, and just recently wound up in a new owner's hands. Can you imagine how much better the city would have been if they would have taken some of the vacant space that litters Atlanta, and developed those worthless parking lots into new residential, retail, and office, that all had easy access to MARTA, and the rest of the city? It would have been incredible.

    Look, it's clear you don't know anything about smart urban planning. Your arguments have been built on two things: (i) That you're from NYC, and (ii) That you like to use incorrect estimates rather than real facts. If you want to try to tell me that NYC is more segregated than Atlanta, go ahead. Anyone who's ever set foot in that city knows your wrong. If you want to tell me that, because a population "as a whole" is becoming more diverse, that means the city is benefitting, despite the fact that none of that new diversity is being woven together and connected, go ahead. The only theme here is that you continue to provide poorly thought out arguments, and are trying to use one small statistic to support an argument that requires a lot more...substance...than that...

  22. Just to jump in (perhaps unwisely), but although Lindbergh, Atlantic Station , and the Gulch seem to have gotten a lot of things wrong from a planning and execution standpoint, they are not responsible for dispersal of low income, African American residents in Atlanta. Urban Renewal did this in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, when the city's official planning policy called for the clearance of historic black neighborhoods to the immediate east and south of the central business district (Bedford-Pine, Summerville, Buttermilk Bottom, Butler Street areas), and relocation of the residents to areas further afield in the southwest and west. The idea was to keep the east and north sides of the city predominantly white. The segregated living patterns in Atlanta are the result of these policies, not recent mixed-use developments. For those who are interested in this period in Atlanta's history, I recommend "Regime Politics" by Clarence Stone and "Race and the Shaping of Twentieth Century Atlanta" by Ronald H. Bayor.

  23. That's a fair point, regarding those 3 developments, particularly because those developments came to on desolate areas where there wasn't any residential in the first place. The point that I think is more important is that, with huge master planned developments like those you (I) isolate the development itself from the rest of the city, (II) pull resources away from other areas of the city where they could provide more value, and (III) you eventually chop up the city into a bunch of separate and unconnected areas of master development, thereby segregating your population.

  24. All I can add is that Dekalb County had better be mindful of the traffic congestion already in that area. North Decatur Road is already a parking lot for much of the day. This development is very near that intersection.

Click on a tab to select how you'd like to leave your comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

The Elite 100

WNA’s Picks of ATL’s Best.

View The List
Partner Spotlight
The Wells Marketing Agency

The Wells Agency provides innovative, award winning solutions to companies looking to launch, create buzz, engage with custome...