Real talk about sprawl (Atlanta, Decatur: apartment, condominiums, appliances)

[JPD]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

He means if more people desire to live there the inner city will just get more expensive. That is already how it is now outside of the hood areas.

That's a very big if, but in that case, he better get ahead of the curve and start desiring it before he gets priced out.

I disagree about your "outside the hood" comment, though. There are still deals to be found all over town in some pretty hot areas.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Lady's Man

A question I always ponder is why do people find this way of life appealing? I'm not knocking autmobiles or non-urban living. But why would anyone choose day after to day to drive 10, 20, 30, 40, 50... miles a day, endure horrible traffic, waste increasing resources on gas, etc?

Wouldn't it be nice to walk every now and then... or at least have the option to?

I suspect most of us have nothing like the experience you're alluding to in your first paragraph. My commute is a short, relaxing one in very little traffic, and I love driving so the time I spent in my car is generally enjoyable.

I also have the option to walk every day from my workplace to various places to eat, etc., and the wooded suburban area in which I live is very good for walking around and enjoying the scenery. We also have the Silver Comet Trail a mile away.

Non-urban living doesn't mean what you think it means, I think.

[10 feet tall]

In almost all areas where it has been tried, an urban growth boundary/regulations has made property prices skyrocket. When you take away the low cost of living that Atlanta offers, it loses a serious competitive edge. If the housing costs are similar to other large metro areas, it eliminates many of the reasons people have relocated here.

[hal2814]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

As I've alluded to on prior threads, but which I will now expand on more here, there is one legitimate concern regarding the expansion of transit around the metro area: The enabling of sprawl. If we build more and more highways, they are just going to clog up and enable people to move farther and farther out. There is a real, live cost associated with that. That costs metro Atlantans 13.6 billion dollars each year. Why? More gas wasted, increased pollution, and a whole host of other factors such as increased stress and decreased worker productivity (since people have to leave earlier and get home later).

I worry what spreading a transit system all over the metro area would do to that. I worry that as soon as transit takes some of the cars off, more cars will come to replace them. That is exactly what happens when more and bigger highways are built, and I see no reason why that wouldn't happen with increased transit. Perhaps the same could happen in town as well.

So what to do? For years, I have thought that Atlanta should take an "if you build it, they will come approach": Build mass transit lines, and the development will soon cluster around them. However, for whatever reason, that hasn't happened. Aside from planned transit-oriented communities such as Lindbergh Center, many of the MARTA stations outside of downtown, midtown, and Buckhead are little more than park-and-ride lots and bus terminals. Clearly, something needs to change.

Which came first, then: the chicken or the egg? Lately, I'm beginning to think we should go for the chicken first. That is, we need to boost up density in the urban core, leaving a little space for transit, and THEN expand the transit. So how do we do it? My suggestion, and I know it's going to ruffle a LOT of feathers around here, is to look into a similar system that Portland, Oregon uses: Define a clear urban growth boundary around all the metro areas, and restrict growth outside that boundary. I believe this proposal would gain support from two sectors of the population--one obvious, the other one surprising. Urban Atlantans would no doubt be on board with this in large part: It would help raise property values, and it would conform to many of their values. But an urban growth boundary could also gain a lot of support from an unlikely group of people: Rural Georgians. Many of them see the ever-expanding metro Atlanta as infringing on their way of life. This could be the first ever solid method of counteracting that infringement. Resistance, of course, would come from the suburbs, particularly the exurbs that might find themselves outside the boundary.

This boundary would have to be set far enough out that little disruption would take place in terms of planned or existing growth. It would also have to maintain the property rights of existing rural homeowners: As long as you own and keep the land in your family, you can still do as you please with it. But if someone buys up a tract of land for development, then there could be restrictions on that.

I know that some people are going to decry this as "big government socialism" and possibly spam a bunch of links crying about how Portland's smart growth has failed. First, I want to emphasize that this is not a tax of any sort. It's simply a system that keeps sprawl from growing much further. Second, who really opposes that system? The citizens of Portland? No. They would have repealed it years ago if that were the case. It's the special interest groups who stand to profit on the backs of landowners and the land itself. That's who's no doubt been fueling the anti-smart-growth propaganda.

Whether or not the Transit Investment Act passes or not is, quite frankly, a trivial matter compared to this one. If metro Atlanta refuses to get its sprawl in check, then the TIA will just rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic. If Atlanta is going to get serious again about maintaining its status as an economic powerhouse in the Southeast and not letting cities such as Charlotte and Tampa pass it by, then they need to do this. A lot depends on it.

Did you miss the last 25 years? Sprawl isn't something that can happen in Atlanta. It's something that did happen in Atlanta, even with a transportation infrastructure that in no way kept up with population growth.

As far as roads, I personally like the toll model the NTTA has in place in north Dallas these days. Sure they'll build some major highways out to you if you want to live in the boonies, but you're going to pay for that road yourself. I wouldn't be opposed to any form of taxation or subsidy removal that made the residents or suburbia (or exburbia) shoulder the real costs of living out there, but at the same time I think it should be up to them as to whether or not they're willing to pay that price or whether they'd rather move closer to the city.

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by JPD

That's a very big if, but in that case, he better get ahead of the curve and start desiring it before he gets priced out.

I disagree about your "outside the hood" comment, though. There are still deals to be found all over town in some pretty hot areas.

It's happened in every other metro area with a dense core. It even explains why you get more band for your buck here. There is no "if". It is a reality right now.

[cqholt]

I agree with the comment of impact fees on developers to go towards schools and road improvements. Make the developers create turn lanes at the entrances of a new development. That's what Palm Beach County, FL did when I was growing up there.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

It's happened in every other metro area with a dense core. It even explains why you get more band for your buck here. There is no "if". It is a reality right now.

Wrong. It's common knowledge that Atlanta built more condos over the last decade than they could sell. There are still a lot of empty units, and yet more buildings are under construction. Deals are out there. What you're describing hasn't happened here yet.

[cqholt]

yet more buildings are under construction

The 2 buildings under construction in Midtown are apartments, since more people are renting now.

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by JPD

Wrong. It's common knowledge that Atlanta built more condos over the last decade than they could sell. There are still a lot of empty units, and yet more buildings are under construction. Deals are out there. What you're describing hasn't happened here yet.

You think Atlanta is immune to what has already happened in older cities? You think you get as much condo in midtown as you can house in Gwinnette?

[JPD]

Originally Posted by cqholt

The 2 buildings under construction in Midtown are apartments, since more people are renting now.

If the housing market turns around you'll see those apartments turn into condos.

There's also a huge development under construction on Highland along the beltline. That stretch of Highland is one of the most dense and walkable parts of the city, and it's going to keep growing.