Carter Consulting, an Atlanta real estate development firm, proposed a mixed-used development including residential and student housing, classrooms, plazas, greenspace, and athletic facilities. This includes built environment features that encourage a walkable community, as well as a 30,000-seat football stadium that will replace the former Atlanta-Fulton County stadium. The estimated cost of the 77-acre campus extension plan is $300 million and would be funded by public and private sources. To read the full proposal, click here.
The proposal is transit oriented, includes complete streets, and offers many pedestrian and bicycle routes. Throughout the proposal, planners offer a number of ways in which design can improve the existing area. For example, while I-75/85 Corridor provides convenient regional access to the redevelopment, the proposal recognizes the potential for site design to mitigate noise pollution caused by these interstates. Abernathy/Georgia and Capitol/Aaron are projected to become pedestrian and bicycle routes. Finally, the redevelopment proposes increased connectivity to GSU’s main campus through shuttle services and bike/pedestrian routes.
The redevelopment plans seek to create a unique collegiate experience for students; however planners simultaneously highlight the need for site design and land use that will encourage unity between the new property and existing neighborhoods. Notably, shops at the intersection of Capitol/Hank Aaron and Georgia/ Abernathy aim to serve residents and visitors of the new redevelopment, as well as residents of surrounding neighborhoods. Heritage Park would be expanded to two and a half acres of green space surrounded by mixed-use housing, creating a public space accessible to adjoining neighborhoods. Plans specifically recognize the need to develop the area along the edge of Summerhill in a way that blends in with the neighborhood, as opposed to creating a distinct interface for new buildings.
The proposal repeatedly emphasizes the need to consider existing communities, while creating a transit-oriented development that effectively serves the needs of GSU students and visitors. Carter Consulting acknowledges that a continued dialogue is necessary to ensure optimal solutions are achieved during this project. A more extensive HIA encompassing NPU-V in its entirety has the potential to offer insight and thoughtful planning solutions.
4. Existing Conditions
Next we explore specific health impact categories. Based on general evidence from literature, we describe what is known about the built environment and social and environmental factors that impact the following: health conditions, demographics, employment, housing, green space, food and transportation.
There is some literature on impacts of stadium developments moving into an existing community; however, to our knowledge, there is no literature on the impacts of a stadium leaving a community. The lack of literature in this specific area further highlights the high need for a comprehensive HIA.
4.2 Existing Health Conditions
We begin this section by providing a summary of research exploring the question: What is known about the built environment and social and environmental factors that impact health conditions in a population?
4.2.1 Literature Review of Findings
Our neighborhoods, homes, schools, and jobs impact our health long before we seek assistance from medical professionals (Human Impact Partners, 2012). Urban living conditions, such as socioeconomic status, housing and access to health and social services, shape the day-to-day life of residents. These conditions, though complex and often interrelated, affect the health of neighborhood residents (Freudenberg et al., 2006).
The following describes three dimensions of the neighborhood environment that impact health:
-
Social Environment: This dimension encompasses the how interpersonal relationships function within a community. For example, values shared by a community and the frequency of social interactions within a community create social networks that affect health.
-
Physical Environment: This dimension includes the human built environment. For example, air and water quality, sewage, housing, buildings, highways, streets, traffic patterns, noise, and parks. The built environment also includes the presence of neighborhood services, such as grocery stores, transportation, and health services.
-
Municipal Services: This dimension includes such items as waste collection, water delivery and sewage flow, and code enforcement in the community. For example, if there is poor drainage, then a community may be at risk for flooding.
Both the social and physical environment influence and shape one another and both have the potential to impact population health.
4.2.2 Existing Information about NPU-V
To predict the health impacts of the proposed development, it is critical to understand the current health status of the study area. In 2004, the Annie E. Casey Foundation reported the following health data for the NPU-V community (see Appendix A for maps of related data):
-
64.5 percent of women were overweight versus 44 percent among women citywide
-
Male cancer mortality 50 percent higher than for white men in Georgia
-
Diabetes prevalence 48 percent higher than the decade prior
-
25.4 percent of reported major crimes were classified as violent, compared to 16.8 percent citywide
-
59.3 percent of children are living in poverty
-
28.7 percent of students who attended Carver High School, located in NPU-V, graduated
The data presented by the Annie E. Casey Foundation is over a decade old. It is possible that some findings around health have changed, but the degree of change is unknown.
In 2012, researchers at Georgia Tech reported the following demographic data through the Neighborhood Quality of Life and Health Project (NQLHP, 2012) (see Appendix A for maps of related data):
-
5 percent White; 87 percent black; 1 percent Asian; 7 percent Other
-
12,055 people live in NPU-V
-
45 percent of residents live below the poverty line
-
18 percent of residents hold a college degree, compared to 46.2 percent citywide
-
32.7 percent of housing is vacant, compared to 20.7 percent citywide
-
24 percent unemployment rate, compared to 12.4 percent citywide
The lack of current health data in this area sheds light on the need to establish contemporary baseline health measures through a more extensive HIA.
Share with your friends: |