27 Mar One Georgia: Secure & Connected – Takeaways from the GPA Spring 2026 Conference
Planners from across Georgia spent a day up in Gwinnett at the Gas South Convention Center for the 2026 Georgia Planning Association (GPA) Conference
Members from the KB team joined planners in Duluth to participate in break-out sessions and mobile workshops that touched on topics ranging from the importance of placemaking and how to keep people the center of the public engagement process to long-term visioning for impactful downtowns and the future of the Livable Centers Initiative (LCI). Our recap and takeaways are below.
Re-examining Our Linkages.
All aspects of planning, whether it is land use, transportation, economic development, or housing, are linked together to create our places and communities. However, it is easy for us as planners to get siloed in our respective area of expertise and lose sight of how our area impacts the others – despite our role as being that connector and educator for the public at large on planning matters. Two sessions spoke to this topic.
The first, led by Matteo Saracco and Beth Hoffman from RS&H, touched on the sometimes broken connection between land use decisions and transportation. Despite the intensity of land use directly impacting transportation, we often don’t focus on how they intersect fully. Due to time constraints, transportation planning can center on safety and function and less on network connectivity. Their presentation focused on examples of how planners can leverage a variety of tools to make more informed decisions to better assess corridor redevelopment and future transportation needs while improving actual planning implementation and coordination.
The second session took an even broader perspective – focusing on the underlying connection between a plan and its actual implementation. Led by KB Managing Director Tate Wilson, Niwana Ray (City of Woodstock), as well as Bob Begle and Quynh Pham (LAS), their presentation focused on the ARC’s Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) as it goes into its 26th year and how the recent Woodstock LCI could serve as an example of how we may need to re-examine how we structure and approach our planning projects. Instead of focusing on the traditional broad strokes approach to the plan, it laser-focused on the realities that will be needed to implement the plan’s ideas. The vision for small area plans has largely been set within our region and beyond, our focus needs to shift to implementation. This means that public engagement needs to also adapt to target landowners and developers who, especially for LCI plans, are critical for investing in these areas and making them a reality. Our future plans, regardless which aspect of planning they are centered on, may need to shift to taking the lens of a magnifying glass to assess what is and isn’t feasible from both a financial and regulatory perspective.
Intentionality is Key.
If we as planners want to design and implement projects that enhance communities and strengthen social connections, then there needs to be intentionality both during the engagement in the planning and design process as well as once the plan is created.
Michael Sena (HKS), Jen Price (Sycamore Consulting), and Delilah Wynn-Brown (HJ Russell & Company) stressed the importance of being intentional with public input during the planning process. Their presentation showcased different projects that were the most successful because the proper time and intention was taken to curate the public input process to what fit the existing social framework of the community. A recurring tactic used across all the examples was meeting with key partners early on in the process to draft the community engagement plan together so that a spectrum of voices could be heard and integrated. The conversation also highlighted how, unfortunately, public and stakeholder engagement is often one of the first items cut or reduced from planning project budgets, despite it being an aspect that can make or break the effectiveness of the project during implementation.
Another session, moderated by Elena Oertel from Inspire Placemaking, centered on intentionality during implementation. The panel included local community builders Julie Pierre (Biltmore Innovation District), Abbey Griffith (Clarity Fitness), Emma Marie (All the Tropes), and Erik Bredfeldt (Inspire Placemaking).
The discussion showcased how there are interdisciplinary lessons to be learned from both property managers and retailers. It is important to take the time to see how the community interacts (or doesn’t) with spaces before thinking of ways to intervene and adapt. Placemaking is not guaranteed and has to be curated, just because it is part of the design does not mean the community will come and be connected. Every space and community is different, so it is not always going to be effective to implement “cookie-cutter” designs in hopes of having placemaking within a project. The panel also highlighted how community building should also include those who are outside the traditional planning realm. Obstacles will always remain reaching the entire community (including those who are primarily online), so it also important for community building to be intentional and attractive for people to want to participate.
thinking proactively, not reactively.
Beyond re-examining our planning frameworks and making sure we are being intentional throughout the process, nothing is more critical than being proactive. This was exemplified on multiple fronts during the conference.
Aptly titled “When Growth Comes Knocking”, Claire Breeden and Grace Barrett from Georgia Tech’s Center for Economic Development Research (CEDR) and Mayor Tiffany Zeigler from the City of Pembroke, led a session that explored how Pembroke (2023 pop. of 2,628) responded to the sudden pressures from the announced Hyundai Metaplant nearby. With the anticipation of bringing in over 10,000 new employees to the area, the city had to think critically about how to plan for the further heightened housing needs that would emerge.
The city reached out to CEDR to assist them with navigating these pressures and determining what their best strategies would be. Through this process, the City and CEDR team leveraged data to inform the community of the potential impacts of this significant economic development project and built trust to design a shared vision on how the city can adapt. This partnership also led to the creation of CEDR’s Economic Development Ready Community Certificate (CEDR-C) which recognizes communities that demonstrate strategic readiness for economic growth through planning, workforce development, and infrastructure. Pembroke took action on the recommendations from the work with CEDR including updating their code, adding targeted density bonuses in agreed upon areas, incorporating impact fees on new development, and utilizing Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning.
The conference’s mobile session further emphasized how the key to success often lies in being proactive and thinking long-term. This session brought attendees to some of the great downtowns in Gwinnett – Duluth, Suwanee, and Sugar Hill – to learn how each planned for and implemented bold plans and visions to turn their downtowns into the thriving hubs for both residents and businesses.
For some it started with the initial investment into a greenspace, for others it was full dedication into activating sites, but all have been successful because they were intentional and proactive. They also showcase how one of the most meaningful assets a city can have is publicly-owned land. All three have their city halls centered in their downtown, but they have leveraged their surrounding land to spur redevelopment and curate sought-after spaces. In some instances, they are still the main landlord, allowing for greater control and flexibility on what is attracted and incentivized in that space. In others, the investment was made into a central, free public amenity that brought residents and visitors. This, in turn, aided in attracting private investment to the surrounding parcels and even allowed other publicly-owned sites to sell for a high-enough price to be able to reinvest funds into public facilities.
Across all three visited communities, their focus was on being proactive to set the gears in motion for needed redevelopment and setting a long-term vision so that they could leverage the momentum from their successes to make the timely decisions needed to implement that vision along the way.
Downtown Duluth
Downtown Suwanee
Downtown Sugar Hill