History of Inman Park...and Freeways (Atlanta, Tucker: how much, houses, living)

[gtjared]

Originally Posted by JPD

So what you're saying is that the people displaced by the highways would just disappear, rather than looking for other intown places to live?

That doesn't make any sense.

I'm saying I don't understand why we would give up any more land in the city for highways. On average it would just blight more areas in the city, lessen the available tax base, and make the city less livable in general.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by gtjared

I'm saying I don't understand why we would give up any more land in the city for highways. On average it would just blight more areas in the city, lessen the available tax base, and make the city less livable in general.

I agree with you. I never suggested we should give up any land. I was only talking about what might have happened if we had gone along with the terrible plan to build all those freeways. Atlanta would be a very different place. Some places would defintitely have been harmed, and others probably would have benefitted.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by JPD

I was only talking about what might have happened if we had gone along with the terrible plan to build all those freeways. Atlanta would be a very different place. Some places would defintitely have been harmed, and others probably would have benefitted.

When the freeways were planned, downtown Atlanta was the business hub of the region. In those days it was believed that folks would have to commute in from the suburbs, so it seemed like a good idea to build multiple freeways into the city.

While it seems crazy by today's standards, that was the thinking back in the 1940s and 50s.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by arjay57

When the freeways were planned, downtown Atlanta was the business hub of the region. In those days it was believed that folks would have to commute in from the suburbs, so it seemed like a good idea to build multiple freeways into the city.

While it seems crazy by today's standards, that was the thinking back in the 1940s and 50s.

'40s and '50s? The protests were going on in the '80s. The abutments for the bridge over Moreland were built and were still standing in the '90s.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by JPD

'40s and '50s? The protests were going on in the '80s. The abutments for the bridge over Moreland were built and were still standing in the '90s.

Well, the plans for I-485 and the Stone Mountain Freeway go back to the 1940s and 50s. The original battle to keep them out of Inman Park and other nearby neighborhoods took place in the early 70s, as I recall. That's when we were living in Virginia-Highland.

However, you are right that the so-called Presidential Parkway was revived in the 80s. That's also when they decided to ram GA 400 through the middle of Buckhead. There were fierce wars about both of these projects. Eventually the government gave up in the Morningside/VH area, although they prevailed in Buckhead.

[cqholt]

That's also when they decided to ram GA 400 through the middle of Buckhead. There were fierce wars about both of these projects. Eventually the government gave up in the Morningside/VH area, although they prevailed in Buckhead.

Thought part of the agreement was to run MARAT up the median and to build a pedestrian bridge over 400 to connect the 2 sides of Buckhead?

[Newsboy]

The premise of this thread is flawed. The freeways HAD to go somewhere, and it's speculation to say that the ones that were NOT built would have destroyed east side neighborhoods. GA 400 most certainly did NOT destroy Buckhead and in fact has caused it to thrive.

Don't get me wrong; I am glad a freeway doesn't cut through Druid Hills, the Highlands, Morningside, etc. But properly designed freeways built along better routes would no doubt have made Atlanta a different city today.

[scpatl4now]

Here is where the 2 freeways would have gone



There was GA400 and 485. The dashed lines were proposed and never built. Ga 400 was originally supposed to connect to what is now 675 I believe

[scpatl4now]

Originally Posted by Newsboy

The premise of this thread is flawed. The freeways HAD to go somewhere, and it's speculation to say that the ones that were NOT built would have destroyed east side neighborhoods. GA 400 most certainly did NOT destroy Buckhead and in fact has caused it to thrive.

The premise of this thread was to give a sense of history of intown neighborhoods, not much else. Where it went from there is very interesting not flawed (IMO)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Thought part of the agreement was to run MARAT up the median and to build a pedestrian bridge over 400 to connect the 2 sides of Buckhead?

Yep.