The city of Atlanta is taking a page from Europe’s playbook to confront its housing crisis. Later this month, the mayor’s office will begin to form an “urban development corporation” to eventually produce a type of mixed-income housing never seen here before.
The Atlanta Urban Development Corporation (AUDC) will be “an operationalization of the Affordable Housing Strike Force,” Mayor Andre Dickens’ chief housing advisor, Joshua Humphries, told Atlanta Civic Circle this week. Dickens created the strike force last year to bring various municipal housing efforts under one city hall umbrella.
In forming the AUDC, the city is essentially launching a development group that will initially be funded by the affordable housing trust fund and eventually be staffed by real estate professionals and supported by city employees. The goal is to consolidate publicly owned property, partner with private developers, and build housing that’s affordable to Atlanta’s middle- and low-income residents.
Development corporations are ubiquitous in European countries, Humphries said, and the city of Atlanta is especially eyeing the so-called “social housing model” embraced in places like Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and Vienna. “Social housing takes the best pieces of U.S.-style public housing and the best pieces of private-market housing development and brings them together,” he said. “This allows for a higher percentage of market-rate units in a project than you would see in traditional public housing.”
The AUDC would spawn residential complexes often owned—at least partially—by the city. At least a third of the units would be affordable for households earning no more than 80% of the area median income (AMI)—or about $77,000 for a family of four. At least half of those affordable units would be earmarked for households earning 60% of the AMI or below.
Currently, affordable housing projects in the metro primarily depend on financial help from the Georgia Department of Community Affairs. But with the state’s Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) becoming increasingly competitive, the goal of the AUDC is to devise a development model less reliant on public subsidies. “We have less availability to use the primary tool that’s created affordable housing units in the city,” Humphries explained. “I think it’s incumbent on us to do everything we can to create new affordable housing units—using different models and different sources than we historically have.”
And having some market-rate units spread throughout an otherwise public housing development “actually helps cross-subsidize within the project itself, so once you get the thing going, you can perpetuate the affordable housing units over time.”
Georgia State University urban studies professor Dan Immergluck, one of the most ardent critics of the city’s housing policies, is cautiously optimistic about the AUDC plan: “I actually like this concept,” he told Atlanta Civic Circle in an email, noting that the model has been tested domestically, too—in Maryland, Rhode Island, Washington, and California. “There is an emerging trend toward building public/social housing development entities around the country to get government back in the business of building deeply affordable housing through a mixed-income housing approach.”
Immergluck warned the city to prioritize transparency as its development corporation takes off and said “deep affordability and production volume” should be top of mind.
“The concept of using market-rate housing to develop income to help cross-subsidize deeper affordability on public land makes sense, as long as substantial numbers of deeply affordable units are built,” he said. “Sixty percent AMI is not as good as 50% AMI is not as good as 30% AMI, where the greatest needs are.”
Terri Montague, a senior lecturer at Emory University School of Law and an expert on housing, agreed: The AUDC could “help broaden the city’s finance capacity beyond its historical reliance on tax-driven tools,” like LIHTCs, tax allocation districts, and tax-exempt bond issuances.
“The AUDC would build on Atlanta’s history of using redevelopment authority subsidiaries and public-private partnerships to advance innovative or large-scale public purpose projects,” she wrote in an email. “To the extent that this new entity can generate or draw new funding sources for Atlanta and avoid cannibalizing local philanthropic and low-cost private loan funds that existing city housing partners depend on, the AUDC could prove beneficial to existing developers and projects, as well.”
Immergluck admonished the city for its “very poor track record” with public-private partnerships, asserting that the municipality too often affords developers public incentives disproportionate to the public benefits: “The private partners get most of the upside, and the city gets most of the downside. So it’s good to see that the city aims to have this be permanently staffed, but I fear the partnerships with private developers will be one-sided in favor of the private partners,” Immergluck said. “The devil will be in the details.”
The right to private property is slowly being choked off by social progressives.
That sounds like an otp comment if i ever heard one. Large cities function in ways that leaving it soley in the hands of private interests ultimately can harm the whole of the city in the long run, as private interests often have no concern cumulatively outside of the immediate profitability. A successful city requires long term planning and room for a diverse socio economic population. Atlanta’s affordable housing, under the criminal Renee Glover, was ridiculously allowed to be obliterated. The one to one replacement guideline was abandonded and to this very day 100s of acres sit empty that once housed those in need. Even if federal subsidies had ended, which they were not, there was no reason to demolish every last unit as though it was uninhabitable; and here we sit in a housing crisis. The wealthy are the ones now receiving most of the subsidies via tax
loopholes and giveaways and ooze hypocricy. Is that a “progressive” enough stance?
Your preception is absolutely correct!
Their heart ❤️, mind and plans are not to help the needs of the peoples of lower income 😡. There’s absolutely too many homeless people in the city of Atlanta and the surrounding metro cities. This definitely should NOT BE 😡. All along while Realestate , land, empty buildings stand unused, SMH 🤦🏼♀️! Greed & backwards thinking 🤔 is operating in these so called leaders VS loving 🥰 our neighbors as we love ❤️ ourselves 🙏🏼. To servants for ALL PEOPLE 😳.
I agree this plan needs to happen it’s time to do away with the Renee glover era it completely ruined the authenticity,culture and fabric of this city 15,000 public housing units demolished for propaganda reasons only for the new communities which have no historical value to become crime ridden in the end. Now don’t get me wrong the projects were bad back in the day but they held value respect and were very deep rooted. And not too mention each development was European style based but each had its own unique look giving the neighborhoods they stood in their own identity only with the music that came out of them. Had we had known then what we known now projects like Herndon homes and Capitol homes would still be standing renovated as many of these developments were in far better condition than todays housing that is offered. so to see the city go back to this design is truly a blessing and any one who disagrees is truly ignorant to the history and impact public housing had on real Atliens who lived in them or was associated with them.
Agree. And the idea of some paying market rate while others get subsidized in the same complex is disgusting to me. Can’t stand these commies in power now. No way will I pay market rate and live next door to someone who is on section 8 while I subsidize them as well. I encourage everyone who is doing the right things in life by bettering themselves to boycott apartments like these. Choke off their funding.
That sounds like an otp comment if i ever heard one. Large cities function in ways that leaving it soley in the hands of private interests ultimately can harm the whole of the city in the long run, as private interests often have no concern cumulatively outside of the immediate profitability. A successful city requires long term planning and room for a diverse socio economic population. Atlanta’s affordable housing, under the criminal Renee Glover, was ridiculously allowed to be obliterated. The one to one replacement guideline was abandonded and to this very day 100s of acres sit empty that once housed those in need. Even if federal subsidies had ended, which they were not, there was no reason to demolish every last unit as though it was uninhabitable; and here we sit in a housing crisis. The wealthy are the ones now receiving most of the subsidies via tax
loopholes and giveaways and ooze hypocricy. Is that a “progressive” enough stance?
The comment by Al Meyer, Jr. nailed it. I wish to add my observations as to how the media is constantly playing classes against each other, portraying the wealthy as big, bad meanies who seek to destroy and the homeless are “dangerous drug addicts who need a place to “get their lives back on track.” The truth is more nuanced. Sadly, because of POOR GOVERNANCE, propaganda, eliminating any potential “heros” who may step up (No, I’m not a Trump supporter.), America is slowly falling in a long-term, well-planned, highly organized velvet glove revolution. Sad. America was a noble experiment. What makes it TRAGIC, in my opinion, is that there are ways to stop it, preserve freedom, and exercise compassion. All that can be published by a free press. And it won’t be enough.
I hope that they don’t forget the Disabled people who are on Based Income and can’t afford regular housing with month-month salaries barely being able to live right now I am in need of housing right now
Creating affordable housing is a wonderful undertaking. I just pray that providing ample security and social counseling/assistance will be made to be a priority as well.
Wait till Trump gets them real jobs so they don’t have to be on the government dole. It’s the democratic party’s ways. Keep them poor, relying on the government and they will be out voting base forever
If not mistaken Mayor Franklin tore down all the housing projects one was Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes etc., drug infested and folks got lazy and dependent on the gov’t aid. This is a bad decision housing projects will bring more crime like drugs and all sorts of bad stuff. Heck Atlanta already has a high crime rate for violence this sure won’t solve that problem it only will make matters worse. Instead of boycotting a police precinct this is what people should avoid building housing projects.
This is the same mixed income housing scheme repackaged. They have been trying this for the last 25 years with no success . Castleberry hills apts behind spelman college was a “Mixed Income apt complex” at it’s peak in the Early 2000s.
Why would some one pay market rate for the identical unit next to someone paying 100 a month and have to put up with Problems that are associated with section 8. Constant police and EMS sirens. Loud arguments all time of night, crime unsupervised minors and the ever present trash all over the parking lot. The market rate people move out leaving behind the section 8 and poverty is concentrated again. The the ratio is above 40 % of voucher holders and the complex losses it’s certification to received money from The housing authority. Now you have a spiral into a true slum now that the money is not there to take care of the complex.
European style sounds sophisticated and innovative but the main reason they can pull it off is they are a largely a homogeneous society and value social contracts. Unfortunately stateside that’s not the case. You know what’s going to fix the housing problem? people stop being sorry and go to work. We provide so many services and benefits no one’s incentivized to produce for themselves.
Cautiously optimistic here. Watch who will be associated with the AUDC. While it is a noble cause, to use market-rate to subsidize the affordable units, Immergluck is correct in, “The devil is in the details.” If you open your eyes to the number of development authorities that have been created across the state in the last decade, you’ll see that most have turned rouge and want to continue feeding their insatiable appetite to grow. What we the public are blind to is the growth of salaries for those working for these authorities, contracts for professional services, bonuses, etc. all under the cloak of being able to operate with anonymity without oversight by the public or elected body that appoints the authority. So much for public/private partnership. They get all the benefits of being private without all the checks and balances of being public. We’ve all heard of the stories that have come out of public housing and the $10,000 toilet replacement, well I can guarantee this type of corrupt waste is worse when hidden by the private sector through contracts with development authorities.
This is a good idea for the city YALL out of Townes love complaining about stuff u have no idea on the history behind why there doing this
The city once had numerous housing projects Bowen homes techwood perry homes Eagan homes ,carver homes Leila valley Jonesboro north and south, Englewood manor, Hollywood courts Bankhead courts, Herndon homes,Harris homes all were structures styles were based on European social housing. So it’s basically gonna be like the only projects in terms of how it’s built but still mixed income . So those who have a negative opinion on it don’t really have a understanding of the culture behind social hosuing in Atlanta and it’s huge influence on the music culture here to
Shirley Franklin and Rene glover criminalized and only made the project seem crime based but they were huge culture breeding grounds for a lot of the music you guys listen to today so before u judge off of two shady city work’s propaganda on the projects. Do your history and come back to have a view point this is what’s needed in the city.
This is promising, but the devil will be in the details. I am curious about how this will be different from Centennial Place, which is more than 20 years old now, and what lessons they are applying from that development.
The difference is that the neighborhoods will be built more urban like the neighborhood that came before centennial place. Meaning rowhouses courtyards like the old projects but mixed income centennial place was a decent model at the time but looking back that type of housing does not fit the character of Atlanta and can’t provide more affordable units like the type of housing projects are built in.
I think this will be a good idea the old housing developments each uniquely represented each community they were in and rent was more affordable because they were small but at the same time large apartments not today one big cookie cutter building u see going up all over Atlanta and being the main reason rent is so high because those type of developments require a huge cost when it comes to the infrastructure… the building/development model of the old Atlanta projects they knocked down is what is needed in the city in large amounts and mixing that in with market rate is a great idea.
This type of European style housing has been done to death with slow, degrading consequences. Why do we not learn from our mistakes? The countries mentioned in the article do not have the issues we have. They do not have open borders with now hundreds of thousands of new Americans we have to feed, clothe, house and educate. You cannot compare and open border country with a closed border country. There is no comparison whatsoever!!! To even visit one of those countries requires temporary permission. To become a citizen requires that you have a job to go to immediately that must be in a field that is not filled by current citizens. Of course any type of housing project will work when everyone is working! How tired are we of seeing people beg outside stores with help wanted signs in their windows? I’m a democrat but as my teacher friends tell me about how our children’s educations are pathetic in areas where non-English speaking children must also be educated due to time constraints, I realize the “progressive” bill of goods was just something I fell for like an idiot. I don’t like Trump as a person but I’ll vote for him if given the chance. At least he will close the borders and put America and Americans first!