Mid City Reading

The Mid City Mixed Use plan borrows multiple ideas from the idea of new urbanism. The goal of the plan is to create an environment that is conducive to multiple types of people and sources of transportation. By creating an area that is capable of having pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation, and cars use it, the city is attempting to do this. They are trying to make Macon more accessible to all types of people. Their goal is to liven the downtown area by ensuring that many people, from many circumstances can reach these places. Also, they are planning to use buildings with mixed uses. It is noted that the proposed uses include “at least one hotel with about 120 rooms, apartments with 120-140 units, retail shops, a restaurant and a multi-level parking garage with about 575 spaces”. This would create an area in which people can live closely to everything they need to survive. So close in fact that the people could simply walk where they need to instead of being dependent on cars. This would increase the pedestrian traffic, which in turn livens a neighborhood up. It increases the business in the area and decreases the amount of crime because it increases ‘the eyes on the street’. Also, the act of creating a green space in “an ocean of asphalt” is part of the new urbanism movement. By creating an area that is both aesthetically pleasing and provides a place for the community to gather, the area may become better. However, park areas are volatile. So, if the project does not work out in a successful manner, the creation of the square may actually be detrimental to downtown.

The fact that the creation of the square is such a debatable topic may be a red flag. When the city begins to attempt to force private land owners to sell, it may not be worth it. While three of the corners are provide, the fourth is take up by a business that was founded in the 1930s. It clearly means a lot to the family who owns it and evokes some strong emotions which is shown in the statement made by Roger Wilson, “I just told ‘em hell no, I ain’t going to let you have my property. I worked too hard to get it”. So, does the city have the right to force someone to give up land that has literally been in the family for generations? In this case, it’s really a grey area. While Mayor Reichert argues that it may be essential, the Wilson’s don’t agree. Mike Wilson states “They’re not putting a highway in or building an airport” showing the fact that what they are placing is not something that is a massive undertaking or essential to the survival of downtown. So, is using eminent domain acceptable when the only thing being placed is a park? In my opinion, it isn’t. There should be more negotiations to reach a conclusion that is acceptable for everyone. However, fact that Mayor Reichert is so callous about the topic, as shown in his statement “So this is not just some penny ante…why not here, move down a block, you know?”, may not allow for these negations to occur.