Atlanta’s relationship with the automobile is reaching a crossroads. (Hartwell: foreclosed, big house)

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

The more crowded pictures make my blood pressure rise just thinking about how unpleasant it would be to face that density on a daily basis. At least in rush hour, my car is like a personal bubble.

Yeah, I am not a big fan of packed in people. Walking around NYC just makes me cringe.

Originally Posted by jsvh

More the latter. The inner suburbs already had their time of struggles, but they have been improving and densifying for a decade or two now. They have the advantage of being denser and having a better connected street grid tho.

It will not impact all neighborhoods equally, but on the whole the suburbs in places like Gwinnett and Cobb have an uphill battle ahead of them.

I don't really agree (). As the intown areas densify, and people who want to live in houses and not shoebox apartments are pushed out, they will end up in the suburbs. Those aren't the people who create slums. Most of the suburbs are nowhere near becoming anything resembling a slum, or even a lower-class area. Many are absolutely beautiful.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

As the intown areas densify, and people who want to live in houses and not shoebox apartments are pushed out, they will end up in the suburbs.

If a location is densifing it means it is adding more people, not less. If people are being displaced it means we are not adding enough housing / density to the area fast enough.

[ddm2k]

Originally Posted by jsvh

If a location is densifing it means it is adding more people, not less. If people are being displaced it means we are not adding enough housing / density to the area fast enough.

Pushed out, in this case, not equating to "forced with no other choice". I think it means something closer to "left with no suitable choice" for one's preferences.

If a house meeting your needs in the city (a block or two off the main drag) is out of budget, then technically, density could increase with 1.) buyers with bigger budgets filling those homes, and 2.) apartments / condos being filled with people who will accept that type of housing AND have the budget AND have the willingness to sign the lease or contract.

I think there's enough money out there with tastes for the ultra urban / dense housing that these places keep getting built.

Not my preference, but money talks and BS walks (away).

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

I don't really agree (). As the intown areas densify, and people who want to live in houses and not shoebox apartments are pushed out, they will end up in the suburbs. Those aren't the people who create slums. Most of the suburbs are nowhere near becoming anything resembling a slum, or even a lower-class area. Many are absolutely beautiful.

The city is coming to the suburbs. In many ways it already has. What we used to call suburbs are now referred to as "intown."

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

Pushed out, in this case, not equating to "forced with no other choice". I think it means something closer to "left with no suitable choice" for one's preferences.

If a house meeting your needs in the city (a block or two off the main drag) is out of budget, then technically, density could increase with 1.) buyers with bigger budgets filling those homes, and 2.) apartments / condos being filled with people who will accept that type of housing AND have the budget AND have the willingness to sign the lease or contract.

I think there's enough money out there with tastes for the ultra urban / dense housing that these places keep getting built.

Not my preference, but money talks and BS walks (away).

Yeah, new homes in denseifing locations will keep getting built. Unfortunately it is not happening anywhere near fast enough to keep up with demand. Zoning laws & NIMBYs often force projects to be downsized and even stop them outright.

Also "forced" and "needs" often turn out to be "financially responsible decision" and "wants" when we get down to it. Sure, you may say you "need" a 4 bedroom 3,000SF home with a garage for your family of four and are being "forced" to live in the suburbs to have it. But really that is a "want" and that 1,500SF 3 bedroom home with a more convenient transit ride to work is the more financially responsible choice.

[ddm2k]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Yeah, new homes in denseifing locations will keep getting built. Unfortunately it is not happening anywhere near fast enough to keep up with demand. Zoning laws & NIMBYs often force projects to be downsized and even stop them outright.

Also "forced" and "needs" often turn out to be "financially responsible decision" and "wants" when we get down to it. Sure, you may say you "need" a 4 bedroom 3,000SF home with a garage for your family of four and are being "forced" to live in the suburbs to have it. But really that is a "want" and that 1,500SF 3 bedroom home with a more convenient transit ride to work is the more financially responsible choice.

And most likely, the smaller, more centrally located home will do better in a down market.

Buyers think they're getting a "heck of a steal", writing off bonus rooms as home offices, but that will come crashing down in the next correction when they get laid off and can't sell their house - or get audited.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

If a location is densifing it means it is adding more people, not less. If people are being displaced it means we are not adding enough housing / density to the area fast enough.

The amount you can twist words never ceases to amaze me. Let me repeat, and I'll bold the important parts: "and people who want to live in houses and not shoebox apartments are pushed out, they will end up in the suburbs."

I didn't say there will be fewer people in town. I said that people who want, desire, crave, yearn, long for, or aspire to live in a house instead of much smaller intown properties designed for dense living will end up leaving town for the suburbs. I guess I shouldn't have said "pushed" since you took that so literally. They are led to move to get what they desire at a price they can afford.

Sure, you may say you "need" a 4 bedroom 3,000SF home with a garage for your family of four and are being "forced" to live in the suburbs to have it. But really that is a "want" and that 1,500SF 3 bedroom home with a more convenient transit ride to work is the more financially responsible choice.

If your job is on transit. Otherwise it's most certainly not convenient. Riding transit for me, even if I lived on top of the five points station, would be incredibly inconvenient.

Everything is a want. Except for food and water to survive, everything else in life is a want. Bike lanes are a want. Transit is a want. Roads are a want. Walkable urban fabric vibrancy is a want. None of that is a need. Moving to the suburbs for that house is absolutely a want if someone does not want to live the much smaller intown life. Contrary to popular belief, intown dense urban fabric vibrancy is not high on everyones' list. On some people's list, it's quite low. If I want a 3,000 square foot home, who are you to tell me I'm wrong?


Either way, I don't see those area becoming slums in any of our lifetimes, or our children' lifetimes.

Originally Posted by ddm2k

And most likely, the smaller, more centrally located home will do better in a down market.

That's but one of many factors people use to choose a house. And for many, it's not as important as to how the house fits their desired lifestyle.

Buyers think they're getting a "heck of a steal", writing off bonus rooms as home offices, but that will come crashing down in the next correction when they get laid off and can't sell their house - or get audited.

Again, that's few peoples' reason for moving to a larger house. One of my friends lives in Acworth and commutes all over town for his job. Several people have asked why he lives so far away when he's pulling 12-16 hour days at work. For him, being near the lake where he can take his boat out and fish anytime he wants is much more important than other factors. Everyone has their own reasons.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Again, that's few peoples' reason for moving to a larger house. One of my friends lives in Acworth and commutes all over town for his job. Several people have asked why he lives so far away when he's pulling 12-16 hour days at work. For him, being near the lake where he can take his boat out and fish anytime he wants is much more important than other factors. Everyone has their own reasons.

I know some people like that put on a facade but do not really seem that happy. They say they do it so they "can go out and fish anytime they want" but when asked the last time they went out fishing is often at least a month ago because they have been so busy at work and of course spend an additional couple of hours in traffic each day as well. In fact they don't even get time to spend with their family all that much.

I'd caution against getting getting that caught up in the rat race and make sure you are very deliberate in prioritizing what is important in life. If you really want to spend most of your time fishing on the lake (or with family) there are a lot better ways to do it than buying a huge house on a lake and working 12-16 hours a day to fund it.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I know some people like that put on a facade but do not really seem that happy. They say they do it so they "can go out and fish anytime they want" but when asked the last time they went out fishing is often at least a month ago because they have been so busy at work and of course spend an additional couple of hours in traffic each day as well. In fact they don't even get time to spend with their family all that much.

I'd caution against getting getting that caught up in the rat race and make sure you are very deliberate in prioritizing what is important in life. If you really want to spend most of your time fishing on the lake (or with family) there are a lot better ways to do it than buying a huge house on a lake and working 12-16 hours a day to fund it.

Dude is very happy and fishes every weekend, and some weekday mornings if he's not going to work until later. It seems like you're suggesting that most actually do want to live the urban dense lifestyle, and those who don't are just pretending?

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I know some people like that put on a facade but do not really seem that happy. They say they do it so they "can go out and fish anytime they want" but when asked the last time they went out fishing is often at least a month ago because they have been so busy at work and of course spend an additional couple of hours in traffic each day as well. In fact they don't even get time to spend with their family all that much.

I'd caution against getting getting that caught up in the rat race and make sure you are very deliberate in prioritizing what is important in life. If you really want to spend most of your time fishing on the lake (or with family) there are a lot better ways to do it than buying a huge house on a lake and working 12-16 hours a day to fund it.

Lol, how you gonna tell that man where wants to live and how often he fishes? LMAO.