U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-30-2010, 01:19 PM
JPD
 
11,849 posts, read 14,462,248 times
Reputation: 7536

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sk8t View Post
That depends. Is Marta usually noisy?
It is when the trains go by.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2010, 01:21 PM
 
152 posts, read 237,682 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by particle View Post
Agreed. The question is, should the neighboring properties have such an impact on the fate of a project that could benefit the city and the area overall?
Good question. Don't have an answer though ! Discussions involving the concept of Eminent Domain usually emerge in answer to such a question since governments can ,in some cases, acquire property in the name of public good. Do some googling and you will find some recent cases that might provide some helpful perspective from both sides - the homeowners and the local governments seeking to provide services.

Issues relating to ED aside I think that many homeowners will continue to oppose aggressive development though the economy seems to have taken care of that for them. It wasn't that long ago that new condos were being thrown up seemingly every month with every nook and cranny of ITP space being snapped up for some type of housing infill homes, condos, lofts. Of course now we see many of those developments languishing with small occupancy rates and auctions to unload unsold units. These developments help no one's property values.

I can see it from both sides - as an owner you want to do everything you can to keep that home value up. Developers see the opportunity in high demand areas and want to make money. Can't blame them though the result isn't always pleasant or beneficial to the existing homeowners. The city can benefit from increased tax revenue but then has to find ways to deal with updating the infrastructure to accommodate the new growth. Of course some claim that city officials took payoffs from developers even at a time when studies showed that certain areas couldn't reasonably sustain services with the added development but that is another issue. But as mentioned the cooling of the economy has chilled out a lot of this but your question remains.

Last edited by Somoso; 11-30-2010 at 01:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 01:38 PM
 
28,109 posts, read 24,639,595 times
Reputation: 9523
Quote:
Originally Posted by particle View Post
The question is, should the neighboring properties have such an impact on the fate of a project that could benefit the city and the area overall?
It's an extremely complicated issue. What is the nature of the project? What is the neighborhood and what are its dynamics? Who determines what the benefit is, and who it will go to? Will benefits really flow to the city overall, or just certain parts of it? What sort of recompense is there for those who will be negatively impacted? What about questions of historical, racial and environmental justice? How will things be changed 20, 50 or 100 years down the road? What are the alternatives?

One the classic examples of the "greater good" versus "NIMBYs" is the way Robert Moses proceeded in New York. In the 1930s-70s, planners like Moses believed that the only way the city could survive was to clear out huge swaths of the "cluttered" urban areas like Soho, the Village, Downtown, etc., and replace them with huge, fast-flowing freeways. They'd be elevated, and would pass right through all the huge new buildings that were envisioned. The planners believed that the future lay in the creation of vast suburbs beyond the city, and facilitating rapid auto travel to and from those suburbs.

Moses was withering in his assault on the neighborhoods, and he basically had the power to do anything he wanted. It wasn't until Jane Jacobs and other neighborhood activists came on the scene that there was any effective opposition. If the city and Moses had had their way, there'd be no more Tribeca or Soho, and there's be a massive freeway dumping right into Washington Square.

There've been countless such battles all over the place, including Atlanta. See the recent thread on I-485 and GA 400. Many insisted that the greater good necessitated tearing a gash through Midtown and Virginia-Highland. Ask the folks in Grant Park or in NPU's V or T if they think 1-20 served the greater good. See if the residents next to the Oak Grove or Gun Club landfills believe it was fair to burden their communities for the greater good.


In most cases municipalities and county and state agencies have the ultimate hammer of condemnation. If they really want to use it and have complied with the necessary requirements. But community input -- NIMBYism, if you want to call it that -- is critical. For anybody who doesn't think so, wait until your neighborhood is targeted for something you don't like!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 02:40 PM
 
727 posts, read 1,036,261 times
Reputation: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk8t View Post
That depends. Is Marta usually noisy?

Not as noisy as the "L" in chicago.

I believ the Emory/North druid hills line was a subway(No Noise) But i could be wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 03:07 PM
 
248 posts, read 543,565 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somoso View Post
Yes but why is that a surprise ? Again most people would not want to live next to an apartment/condo (new or otherwise) if they could just as easily live in a comparable house down the street with houses on either side.
If the apartment or condo is mixed-use and has desirable retail on the bottom, that's an amenity for people in the building and nearby homeowners. Look at downtown Decatur -- many detached houses are near the square and the residents can take advantage of stores on the bottom of the residential multi-family buildings along Ponce there. It's a plus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 03:31 PM
 
152 posts, read 237,682 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by StAubin View Post
Not as noisy as the "L" in chicago.

I believ the Emory/North druid hills line was a subway(No Noise) But i could be wrong.
It was intended to be light rail - above ground.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Jersey City, NJ
349 posts, read 660,611 times
Reputation: 307
Admittedly I have only skimmed over the majority of posts here so forgive me if I have misinterpreted. However I thought I saw it mentioned that expanding public transit could have negative consequences on property values due to noise and other factors. I just wanted to point out that in some parts of the country proximity to public transportation is considered a positive and properties closer to public transport command higher prices. So while it may be negative in the short term due to the culture of looking down on public transport (and noise) it may actually be positive for those home owners in the long term.

Edit: After going back and reading everyone's posts I can see how having noisy train lines near your house would lower values IF you were not near an access point. In other words, if you only received the negative aspects such as noise etc and none of the positives such as access to that transportation then that is definitely a negative for home owners in that situation.

Last edited by Lagwagon113; 11-30-2010 at 08:32 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2010, 07:58 AM
 
9 posts, read 13,749 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
It's an extremely complicated issue. What is the nature of the project? What is the neighborhood and what are its dynamics? Who determines what the benefit is, and who it will go to? Will benefits really flow to the city overall, or just certain parts of it? What sort of recompense is there for those who will be negatively impacted? What about questions of historical, racial and environmental justice? How will things be changed 20, 50 or 100 years down the road? What are the alternatives?

One the classic examples of the "greater good" versus "NIMBYs" is the way Robert Moses proceeded in New York. In the 1930s-70s, planners like Moses believed that the only way the city could survive was to clear out huge swaths of the "cluttered" urban areas like Soho, the Village, Downtown, etc., and replace them with huge, fast-flowing freeways. They'd be elevated, and would pass right through all the huge new buildings that were envisioned. The planners believed that the future lay in the creation of vast suburbs beyond the city, and facilitating rapid auto travel to and from those suburbs.

Moses was withering in his assault on the neighborhoods, and he basically had the power to do anything he wanted. It wasn't until Jane Jacobs and other neighborhood activists came on the scene that there was any effective opposition. If the city and Moses had had their way, there'd be no more Tribeca or Soho, and there's be a massive freeway dumping right into Washington Square.

There've been countless such battles all over the place, including Atlanta. See the recent thread on I-485 and GA 400. Many insisted that the greater good necessitated tearing a gash through Midtown and Virginia-Highland. Ask the folks in Grant Park or in NPU's V or T if they think 1-20 served the greater good. See if the residents next to the Oak Grove or Gun Club landfills believe it was fair to burden their communities for the greater good.


In most cases municipalities and county and state agencies have the ultimate hammer of condemnation. If they really want to use it and have complied with the necessary requirements. But community input -- NIMBYism, if you want to call it that -- is critical. For anybody who doesn't think so, wait until your neighborhood is targeted for something you don't like!

Excellent post! Do you think it would have been better to have the interstates converge at some point other than downtown? Where?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2010, 09:25 AM
 
248 posts, read 543,565 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
It's an extremely complicated issue. What is the nature of the project? What is the neighborhood and what are its dynamics? Who determines what the benefit is, and who it will go to? Will benefits really flow to the city overall, or just certain parts of it? What sort of recompense is there for those who will be negatively impacted? What about questions of historical, racial and environmental justice? How will things be changed 20, 50 or 100 years down the road? What are the alternatives?

One the classic examples of the "greater good" versus "NIMBYs" is the way Robert Moses proceeded in New York. In the 1930s-70s, planners like Moses believed that the only way the city could survive was to clear out huge swaths of the "cluttered" urban areas like Soho, the Village, Downtown, etc., and replace them with huge, fast-flowing freeways. They'd be elevated, and would pass right through all the huge new buildings that were envisioned. The planners believed that the future lay in the creation of vast suburbs beyond the city, and facilitating rapid auto travel to and from those suburbs.

Moses was withering in his assault on the neighborhoods, and he basically had the power to do anything he wanted. It wasn't until Jane Jacobs and other neighborhood activists came on the scene that there was any effective opposition. If the city and Moses had had their way, there'd be no more Tribeca or Soho, and there's be a massive freeway dumping right into Washington Square.
You've made some great points here. This is something I don't consider enough when I made my own blanket statements against NIMBYism -- that there are historically significant neighborhoods that serve the residential population well that really do deserve protection.

I'm certainly glad that the surviving historic buildings of my Fairlie-Poplar neighborhood were not torn down to make room for parking decks like so many neighboring properties. The big urban-renewal projects (like the stadiums and convention centers) of the 1970s resulted in turning many historic buildings of downtown Atlanta into asphalt and parking decks to serve drivers.

I would turn into a NIMBY myself if anyone proposed tearing down any more historic buildings in my neighborhood. Food for thought -- thanks for the reality check.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2010, 09:35 AM
 
28,109 posts, read 24,639,595 times
Reputation: 9523
Quote:
Originally Posted by reet4587 View Post
I would turn into a NIMBY myself if anyone proposed tearing down any more historic buildings in my neighborhood. Food for thought -- thanks for the reality check.
There has to be give and take. It's certainly not fair for a handful of people to exercise veto power over projects that that are well thought out, and that do offer clear benefits to the larger community. City life is complicated -- lots of people with lots of competing interests. That can make things frustrating at times, and I've several times experienced that aggravation myself.

But in the bigger picture it's critical to make sure city residents have a voice and that their input is meaningful. After all, if we don't take good care of our people and the investments they've made in the community, they may not stick around!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top