Executive Summary

振兴经济的亚特兰大,公民权力决定进行一次大规模的地下亚特兰大复兴项目。

地下亚特兰大是一个伟大的成功,会给你带来每年数百万的游客,使亚特兰大成为举世闻名的会展中心。然而,随着整体经济萧条,地下亚特兰大因为不断恶化的环境恶化,最后关闭和犯罪。

To revitalize the economy of Atlanta, the civic authority decides to conduct a large-scale rejuvenation project of Underground Atlanta. 
Underground Atlanta was a great success which brings millions visitors every year and makes Atlanta a world-famous convention center. However, with the overall economy depression, Underground Atlanta was deteriorated and finally closed due to the worsening environment and crime. 
In order to revitalize the economy of Atlanta, local authority collected opinions from all walks of life. Some stakeholders think rejuvenation of Underground Atlanta is the best way to revitalize the economy. On the other hand, it was not a perfect plan. First, it involved massive capital investment from city. The source of the funds remains a question. And other organizations would only invest a small proportion, which indicated lack of confidence to this project. Second, unemployed people are supposed to get specialized vocational training rather than just take unskilled or less-skilled job. 
Therefore, transforming Underground Atlanta into a creative hub is highly recommended. First, the old blocks carrying Atlanta history could inspire them to innovatively re-decorate this place. Second, the residing of creative companies, workshops or studios could not bring new capital and dynamism to this area, but also create a lot of skilled and unskilled jobs for Atlanta. Through introducing sunrise industries, Underground Atlanta could consume little investment, but become a dynamic creative hub which brings sustainable visitor flow and revenue.
A report on Underground Atlanta Rejuvenation
As a convention center, Underground Atlanta was a great success to facilitate the convention function of Atlanta. With the economic depression and the spread of criminal activities, the Underground Atlanta suffered a blight and turned into a not-favored site in the city. To boost the economy, some civic councils and stakeholders were convinced that rejuvenate the Underground Atlanta could give impetus to the economy which could push the employment rate at the same time. However, from the perspective of economic security and sustainability, redevelopment of Underground Atlanta is not the only method to revitalize the economy and employment of Atlanta. Many underlying risks could come out during the process of Underground Atlanta rejuvenation.

1. What the reasons and problems are
Underground Atlanta was a great success in the last two decades, no matter economically or socially. It brought a significant revenue and reputation to this city. In the peak time, it host 3,500,000 visitors, which created $17 million revenue to the city. Atlanta, as a world-famous convention city, Underground Atlanta complemented its positioning which provided entertainment facilities to the visitor every year. However, due to multiple reasons, it experienced a decline since 1970s and finally closed in 1982 and became a ghost city after working hours and on weekends. It was a huge loss to Atlanta authority and local people. No more revenue could be generated and local people lose a place to relax in their spare time. Witnessing the ups and downs of this area, what are the reasons of Underground Atlanta becoming a blight? 
First, the economic depression in 1970s is the main reason of this change. The economic downturn led to a less demand of conventions and entertainment facilities.  The decreasing numbers of visitors to this area not only cut down the sales revenue, but also decreased the tax income of the city government. 
Second, a lack of proper and efficient management of Underground Atlanta, which led to a spread of crime in this area. People were not willing to stay or visit Underground Atlanta for the sake of their personal safety. At the same time, lowering the age for drinking made pubs and bars noisy which also resulted in the loss of customers. 
Third, a shortage of capital made government and local authority not able to keep this place in order. Increasing crime rate scares the visitors away from this area. However, if the order of this area was retained, an additional force of police would be required. An extra amount of investment should be put in Underground Atlanta. 
Fourth, losing control of property and operations. Due to the inefficient working models of local authority, the supervision of property and operations were shifted to other parties. 
Fifth, the construction of MARTA and Five Points did release the traffic pressure to some extent, however, on the other hand, owing to the thoughtless inappropriate civic planning, it damaged some of the tourist attractions alongside, which also resulted in the loss of revenue.
Considering the reasons above, redeveloping Underground Atlanta was not the best solution. The root of this problem cannot be solved simply by rejuvenation.
First, the economy and financing issue. Rejuvenating Underground Atlanta required a large amount of capital, in which a large proportion would come from loans and bonds. In order to rehabilitate Underground Atlanta, ADDA would issue project revenue bonds, the total amount of which was approximately $58 million. And  a proportion of these funds would be used to construct all the noncommercial components of the project, the remainder would be lent to the private developer to help finance the commercial aspects of the project. Even though only a proportion of the bond proceeds would be lent to the partnership, the partnership would be liable to pay the authority all fund it needed in excess of Debt Service Reserve Fund interest earning and parking revenues to repay the bonds. The term and the rate is 9.5% of 30 years, which was at a relatively high level. Moreover, there was no other funds involved. As estimated by the American City Corporation, net revenue per square foot of $600 was forecast. In this case, if the revenue could not meet $600, the capital chain would be interrupted and the rejuvenation work would be forced to stop. Then the previous investment would be a huge waste. It was unreasonable to waste taxpayers’ money. On the other hand, social investment could be a major partner in this project. If the social investors thought this project was highly promising and profitable, they could put the capital in rather than using taxpayers’ money.
Second, it was said that 3,000 job vacancies of private sectors would be created. The majority of job opportunities would be in retailing and food service so they would be available to relatively unskilled or less-skilled people. However, the high unemployment rate was just partly due to the desertedness of Underground Atlanta. As a matter of fact, the downturn of the economy and the inadequacy of vocational education were the underlying reasons. Rejuvenating Underground Atlanta would not be the placebo to this issue. Local authority were supposed to shoulder the responsibility to provide vocational training to unskilled people, rather than just let them work in unskilled field. Training unskilled workers could not only elevate their competency in the society in the long-term, but also contribute to the sustainable economic development in the district. By doing this, in the short-run, skilled workers could be cultivated to fill the job vacancies and make a good living through specialized work. Furthermore, they could lead a dignified life then. In the long-term, it could eradicate the problem of crime and poverty once for all. 
Third, Underground Atlanta had already set an image of crime, physical threat and decline in the society. Rooted in the heart of the visitors, it was difficult to change the set image in a short period. To gain the visitors back, the government had to spend much energy and capital to publicize the redeveloped Underground Atlanta and set a brand-new image of it, however, the result of the publicity could not be guaranteed. 
Fourth, redeveloping Underground Atlanta aimed to attract visitors and re-injected dynamism to this area again. However, wealthy people of Atlanta and its surroundings were not willing to mingle with people from other social classes or other races. Therefore, this project could not achieve the goal set by the planners.
Fifth, due to ill-considered civic plan of Atlanta, MARTA and Five Points had already ruined the tourist sites along its route. No matter what investment would be made, reestablishing Underground Atlanta could not restore these old tourist attractions. The loss of its old charm made it not necessary to reinvest Underground Atlanta. People would not visit Underground Atlanta for its convenient transportation only.
To revitalize the economy, a full-fledged development plan should be carefully designed rather than simply re-invest in the unpredictable, large-scale, high-profile rejuvenation plan.

2. The evaluation criteria of Underground Atlanta project
To evaluate whether a development could work in this area. The following criteria must be taken into consideration.
First, sustainable economic development. To keep an area economically alive and dynamic, a sustainable economic impetus should be offered. A sustainable and stable economic development could not only bring healthy business but also create job opportunities. 
Second, eradication of crime and poverty. The existence of crime, to some extent, was partly due to poverty and lack of skill education. Unemployed population who were living in poverty was one of the major reasons of the social instability. To solve this problem, the key was to offer skill training and make them eligible to meet employers’ requirements. The more qualified the personnel are, the more prosperous economy they will create. At the same time, from the long-term perspective, they could gain a better living condition with skills.
Third, the attraction to the target group. Rejuvenating Underground Atlanta aimed to attract people to visit and consume in this area. However, the set perception of this area was about crime and physical threat, decline. Through restoration of Underground Atlanta could not easily shift its old image and win this area a bright future
Fourth, the investment made should be highly cost-effective. The massive capital invested on this project should be well distributed and calculated in case of any extra changes. Once the project started, whether the investment could make profits accordingly must be evaluated carefully.
Fifth, a stable cash flow of the project. To start a rejuvenation project like Underground Atlanta scale requires stable, massive and strong financial support. Any interruptions of the capital could cause the failure of the whole project. A thoroughly financing plan should be designed and testified before the project. The source of the capital and the reserve fund should be confirmed before the project. If the projects involved loans or bonds from other organizations or institutions, the capability of repayment should be considered and carefully examined. To guarantee the cash flow was a must for this large-scale project. Sustainable and stable capital source must be ensured before the initiation of the project.

3. What other options we have 
To revitalize Atlanta, there were other options which did not require much investment, but could balance economic development and convention industry.
To fully utilize the old blocks of Underground Atlanta, the property could be leased to artists or people who worked in the creative industries. Two decades’ development of this area left many deep historical and cultural marks which was a magnet to the artists. They could renovate the old blocks and transform them into innovative workshops or studios. 
As the Underground Atlanta was deserted after a huge economic success, Underground Atlanta itself carried a rich history of Atlanta development. As a convention city, making slight changes and turning it into a museum which displayed the growth path of the city and this area could also regain its status among the tourists. 

4. Policy evaluation 
The policies concerning the rejuvenation of Underground Atlanta remained to be discussed. Effective and enforceable policies were necessary to guarantee the project development.
First, to initiate this project required massive capital and constant cash flow. The willingness of taxpayers to invest in this project should be taken into serious consideration. An opinion poll should be done before taking action. And moreover, whether taxpayers could retrieve their investment back in an appropriate period of time remained a question. 
Furthermore, based on the market principle, if it was proven to be a profitable project, social companies and organizations would seize this opportunity and be eager to charter this project as a whole package. However, judging from the current situation, social capital holders were still holding a wait-and-see attitude. Their hesitation demonstrated clearly that this project was not being looked promising by the market. It was in fact not a recommended project.
Second, Underground Atlanta was a slum now which was abandoned by visitors and local people as well. Thanks to the violent incidents and frequent criminal activities in this area, it had already set a negative image of crime, physical threat and decline. The public perception of Underground Atlanta could not be easily shifted in a short time. If this place was rejuvenated and opened to public again, to guarantee the security of the visitors, a large numbers of additional private and city police must be required as an extra measure. It burdened the taxpayers more heavily.
Third, in Atlanta, there was also existing a most delicate racial problem. The people who own the disposable income were not willing to consume in a complicated environment. Black people and white people in this area could not get along well. Therefore, even Underground Atlanta was re-opened, only half of the city population would be attracted. The sales revenue in this area still could not be guaranteed. 
Fourth, lowered drinking age makes bars and pubs were noisy. The application of this rule pushed the target customers away from these entertainment facilities. To abandon this rule would require a large amount of time. During this time, the income of this area would be under stress.

5. Displaying alternatives and selecting among them
Leasing the whole property out to innovation individuals and companies, or turning it into a history museum after slight changes could be two good options which could lower the investment amount and meanwhile, receive even better social and economic effects.
From the perspective of overall healthy and sound development of Atlanta in the long-term, letting out the premise to creative industries was the best option so far. 
As Underground Atlanta was an old tourist attraction in last 20 years. This place could be transformed into a new creative hub or office space which targeted the artists. Artists could creatively rejuvenate this place based on its old structure and culture and turn it into an artistic resort. By attracting creative industries which are of high-added value, it could bring new dynamism to this city, meanwhile, massive capital and talented people would follow the creative business to Atlanta. Furthermore, many skilled and less-skilled job opportunities could also be created. 
Due to the instinct characteristics of creative industries have, the entertainment facilities, such as bars, restaurants, food stands, would also follow their steps and form a healthy economic ecosystem. All the creative industries-concerning facilities would be equipped then. Tourists and visitors would be attracted to this distinctive hub.
To cater to the development of creative industries, government and social vocational academy could apply this opportunity to provide proper and corresponding training to the unskilled and less-skilled people. With acquiring living skills, the unemployed population could gain a good living through legitimate work, rather than commit crime or live in a miserable condition. 
By adopting this approach, the overall economy and the image of Atlanta would be elevated to a new high level. Meanwhile, with the growing of creative industries, Atlanta could not only gain its convention center status back, but also gain revenues from the emerging creative industries. It would be become a win-win no matter in the long term or in the short period. 

Source from Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning