Epsten, Dagmar B., and M. Arch. “INNER-RING SUSTAINABLE URBAN REGENERATION, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, USA.”
Dagmar Epsten writes about three specific downtown locations in Atlanta that have achieved certification under LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. She describes the locations to be within the “inner-city ring” of Atlanta that contains low-to-medium density of population.
She introduces the paper with a detailed description of the factors of Atlanta’s urban sprawl, which is the largest in the entire nation. Dagmar uses this introduction of sprawl to establish the idea of developments that present an alternative to urban sprawl.
The three examples used in the paper include Atlantic Station, Technology Square at Georgia Tech, and Edgewood Offices. For each, Dagmar describes the location, density, transportation, and urban environmental benefits.
Toward the end of the paper, Dagmar discusses the utilization of “inner-ring development” in Atlanta. She describes how the trend of the past several years has been to redevelop these areas to create more sustainable development. Here, she begins to write about the Beltline, and how the project connects the “underutilized areas” in the inner ring. Dagmar says the Beltline “would also likely contribute to transportation and density goals for developments in its proximity which like the projects presented in this paper, might aspire to be examples of sustainable development and perhaps also pursue LEED objectives”.
Dagmar Epsten was the president of The Epsten Group Inc., a sustainable building design firm located in Atlanta. She received her education at Georgia Tech and is currently employed there as a lecturer in the College of Design. Much of her career has revolved around the design of building that pass LEED requirements, which are mentioned throughout the source.
Hegeman, K. (2016). Conversations in clay: Engaging community through a socially engaged public art project. The Journal ofArt for Life. 8(2).
“Conversations in Clay: Engaging community through a socially engaged public art project” describes the 2013 public art project installed on the Atlanta Beltline known as “Conversations in Clay”. Kira Hegeman writes about how the project created a space for community members to communicate and make art together, and how these activities were meant to make an impact. The project was a part of the public art festival known as “Art on the Beltline”, which provides spaces for artists to create public art along the bike/walking trails. Hegeman spends the first half of the article describing the goals of the project and how it was going to work. Hegeman explains that one of the priorities of the project was to initiate conversation and social interaction through art making. She says, “Conceptually, the project was a fusion of public are and community art”. Her and her colleagues chose to use Georgia clay for the sculptures in order to allow a feeling of connection to the location. They also chose a theme of “dreams” because it “reinforced their initial goal of opening an environment for conversation through the outlet of art making”.
Hegeman spends the second half of her article actually outlining how the project turned out. The project had four sessions, each with different turnouts. She describes how the third session was nearly ruined by a rainstorm, but how the forced collaboration of the participants created a feeling of closeness early on in the session. Hegeman also gives specific examples of some participants, such as a woman who sculpted her “first novel” as a reflection of her dreams, and how a family of four created sculptures influenced by dreams they had had in their sleep.
The project outlined in Hegeman’s article really portrays the abilities of the Beltline, specifically the “Art on the Beltline” project. Ryan Gravel designed the Beltline with the idea in mind that it would create an environment that catalyzed social interaction amongst everyday people, and this article reflects a perfect example of that. Throughout the article, Hegeman cites several sources varying from other art journals and newspapers.
The very end of the article describes Kira Hegeman. The article was written in 2016 while Kira was pursuing her PhD in Art Education at UGA. She also worked as the Art Director for an organization in Thailand called Art Relief International, where she grew her interest in public art.
HAYNIE, S. Dawn. “THE ATLANTA STREETCAR: an analysis of its development and growth as it relates to the Core Cognitive Structure of the City.”
Dawn Haynie writes “The Atlanta Streetcar: An analysis of its development and growth as it relates to the Core Cognitive Structure Of the City” to describe and analyze the Streetcar system in Atlanta. The work is a paper she wrote while attending Georgia Tech College of Architecture, however, Haynie is now currently an Assistant Professor of Interior Design at Georgia State. She has earned her Bachelor’s degree in Architecture at Auburn; Master’s in Science, History, Theory, and Criticism of Architecture and Urban Design at Georgia Tech; and PhD in Urban Morphology at Tech as well.
Haynie begins with a brief history of the railroads in Atlanta and how/why streetcars were eventually created as well. She mentions how Atlanta was previously known as Georgia’s terminus for railway, connecting several major railroads. She writes about how Richard Peters and George Adair founded the first streetcar system in Atlanta, the Atlanta Streetcar Railway Company, which used cars driven by horses and mules. As problems began to affect the streetcar system such as labor disputes and fixed fares, the city felt the need to adopt some sort of plan to better organize the system: the “Constructive Plan for Present and Future Transportation in Atlanta”. This allowed the streetcar system to be changed and altered with time, which eventually led to the use of the motorbus, which then led to the creation of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA).
The rest of Haynie’s essay consists of an in-depth, complex analysis of the streetcar system, including two ideas that might not be easily comprehensible to people unknown to the subject: metric reach and directional reach. Haynie refers to these ideas many times to explain the placement of certain rails. She explains that the streetcar system was built mostly focusing on the “shifting directional reach core structure of the city”. Haynie then explains what has essentially caused the system to fail, including cost and the advancement of the car.
Her essay ends with several detailed maps of the advancement of the streetcar system through time. The maps help illustrate the relationship between the growth of the streetcar and directional reach.
I chose this source because I believe it is informative on the topic of public transportation, and the fact that the streetcar was built in relation to old railroads is similar to the construction of the Beltline. Gravel wrote in his book on the Beltline, Where We Want to Live, that the eventual plan to the beltline is to build some sort of railway system. This essay contributes to that conversation with the previous history of Atlanta’s streetcar system, and how directional reach affected the density of our street structure in the city.