Atlanta's future sidekick... (Sandy Springs, Roswell, Marietta: apartment, house, movies)

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

You are absolutely right about the powers that Georgia counties have. There was an odd mindset in Georgia in the 19th century about county size as well. Georgia has more counties than any state outside of Texas which is over four times the land area, so too many counties with too small land area. Look at any map with county outlines, all our neighboring states have far fewer counties with much larger footprints in area.

The three mile rule, if I am not mistaken (but would have to look it up to make sure) was on the books against a new incorporation, but didn't apply to annexations for towns already in existence. Atlanta annexed into DeKalb before WWII, would like to see a map to know when they did this, but Atlanta in DeKalb abuts the Decatur city limits and has been that way for decades. Why didn't Decatur go for these areas (East Lake, Kirkwood, Druid Hills, Lake Claire etc) Historical neighborhoods that are in DeKalb county? That was my original thought, these are historical areas, had they been in Decatur instead of Atlanta for the last hundred years, Decatur would have been considered a major city on a national scale and not just Atlanta's small town county seat neighbor.

Because Decatur didn't want that. It has a history of being a very insular community with a strong sense of identity. Even into the late 20th century, Decaturites considered themselves just that and wanted little to do with Atlanta. It was really more like a small GA town somewhere far away from the city than an Atlanta suburb. If you asked someone from here in 1950 where they lived, they would likely answer Decatur, not Atlanta.

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

Because Decatur didn't want that. It has a history of being a very insular community with a strong sense of identity. Even into the late 20th century, Decaturites considered themselves just that and wanted little to do with Atlanta. It was really more like a small GA town somewhere far away from the city than an Atlanta suburb. If you asked someone from here in 1950 where they lived, they would likely answer Decatur, not Atlanta.

You are 100% correct. The decision 150 years ago to spurn the railroads is evidence of this.

All of this has been a big what if... Looking at histories of different communities, some have a mindset of boosterism and growth, others are insular. As a wannabe sociologist/anthropologist, I like examining the mindsets that have shaped our communites. My question is who set this tone for Decatur? Why were they insular when other similar small southern towns strived to be the next big thing? Some succeeded, some didn't.

Your summarization is the reality because Decatur COULD have been a major league city and obviously chose not to be. My point is that Decatur's locale and history would have it as the only viable answer to the OP but it is quite obvious the powers that be in Decatur shunned this. For better or worse (and I am sure as a Decatur resident --and a lovin' one at that -- you are a vote for the better) Decatur has chosen to remain a small town in the midst of a big metropolis.

[DeaconJ]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

You are 100% correct. The decision 150 years ago to spurn the railroads is evidence of this.

All of this has been a big what if... Looking at histories of different communities, some have a mindset of boosterism and growth, others are insular. As a wannabe sociologist/anthropologist, I like examining the mindsets that have shaped our communites. My question is who set this tone for Decatur? Why were they insular when other similar small southern towns strived to be the next big thing? Some succeeded, some didn't.

Your summarization is the reality because Decatur COULD have been a major league city and obviously chose not to be. My point is that Decatur's locale and history would have it as the only viable answer to the OP but it is quite obvious the powers that be in Decatur shunned this. For better or worse (and I am sure as a Decatur resident --and a lovin' one at that -- you are a vote for the better) Decatur has chosen to remain a small town in the midst of a big metropolis.

Decatur is not the only viable answer...I thought I posted a long list that included proof that there were other towns just as thriving and viable as Decatur? I'm sure I did...you didn't believe it?

[JoeP]

This is absurd.

Decatur was never going to be something much bigger than it is. Trying to speculate the change in history from 150 years ago is useless.

Most decent sized metros have a core city, with many smaller communities (some old towns like Decatur or all out suburbs).

Atlanta has no "sidekick" and Decatur is one of many area communities.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

You are 100% correct. The decision 150 years ago to spurn the railroads is evidence of this.

All of this has been a big what if... Looking at histories of different communities, some have a mindset of boosterism and growth, others are insular. As a wannabe sociologist/anthropologist, I like examining the mindsets that have shaped our communites. My question is who set this tone for Decatur? Why were they insular when other similar small southern towns strived to be the next big thing? Some succeeded, some didn't.

Your summarization is the reality because Decatur COULD have been a major league city and obviously chose not to be. My point is that Decatur's locale and history would have it as the only viable answer to the OP but it is quite obvious the powers that be in Decatur shunned this. For better or worse (and I am sure as a Decatur resident --and a lovin' one at that -- you are a vote for the better) Decatur has chosen to remain a small town in the midst of a big metropolis.

I think because Decatur residents always liked the 'status quo', like so many other small towns...the difference is that it happened to be situated 6 miles from a town that wanted the opposite. For example, did you know that before WWII Decatur schools held classes from Tuesday through Saturday? The reason was that it was a way to keep Jews out of the community. Hard to believe that now, but consider that more 'liberal' influences like Emory U. right next door did not play a part in its' development until the mid 20th century.

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by DeaconJ

Decatur is not the only viable answer...I thought I posted a long list that included proof that there were other towns just as thriving and viable as Decatur? I'm sure I did...you didn't believe it?

Yes, I read the post and responded to the point where I felt like I was boring everybody, even myself.

Decatur is 6 miles from downtown Atlanta. Roswell, Marietta, Lawrenceville, Jonesboro, any of the other historical towns in the area are too far out to have had significant overflow growth from Atlanta until the advent of the highway and the automobile post WWII.

Decatur on the other hand, had growth from Atlanta spill into Dekalb at the start of the 20th century, prior to the age of the automobile. EastLake CC and its environs, Druid Hills, other neighborhoods are in DeKalb. Had Decatur had more of a boosterism attitude, they could claim as the county seat of DeKalb a territorial right to these areas, annexed them and kept Atlanta inside Fulton.

As Lovin Decatur mentions, the history of Decaturites has been the opposite. They allowed the city of Atlanta to annex deep into DeKalb. I don't know the exact dates, but Atlanta in DeKalb is older than Buckhead being in Atlanta. The city limits of Atlanta abutted the city limits of Decatur from the early 20th century.

I am sure the outlying towns you have mentioned, Marietta for sure, have had a more pro growth mindset than Decatur. If a Druid Hills or East Lake had popped up within a few miles of the Marietta city limits in the early part of the last century, by golly those guys would have gobbled it up. I am sure Lawrenceville, Roswell etc would have done the same. In fact they have to a degree as all of these have significantly a larger population now than Decatur. Recent annexation talks in Decatur were pooh-poohed by both current residents and proposed residents (much to my surprise, because if I lived in unincorporated DeKalb next door to Decautr, I would be begging to be in the city limits if nothing more than the cache of having Decatur schools instead of DeKalb).

Suburban growth in the latter part of the 20th century doesn't equate with the OP, which is what would be considered a sidekick city to Atlanta? None of the current burbs can compare to a Long Beach, a Newark, an Oakland, a Fort Worth, or any number of prominent second cities close to a major American city.

I know these discussions we have are nothing more than straw, but we all seem to love coming here and making them anyway. A sense of history does emerge which I find interesting. I just don't see the history of any other city in metro Atlanta having the potential to be seen as a "second" city more than a suburb. I made the point that historically Decatur alone had the opportunity, but as LovinD brings up, and I agree, the citizens made a conscious effort to NOT be this type of city.

[lilmusket]

Even existing cities could not annex to within less than 3 miles of existing cities. Now obviously annexations and incorporations that occured before the rule went into affect were grandfathered in. Obviously Decatur, Atlanta, College Park and East Point were contiguous with no buffer.
The duplication of services such as courts, etc to maintain 159 separate counties in Georgia is a drain on the budget. We truly need to consolidate some of these smaller less populated counties in the state. I beleive that the services counties provide should be very limited... primarily being the local unit for the state courts... but for most day to day services that serve a larger more dense populations... well that should be reserved for cities. I think Canada is a great model to follow how they do this.

[lilmusket]

The only US cities that could arguably be sidekicks would be Minneapolis-St. Paul, Dallas-Ft. Worth, San Francisco-San Jose-Oakland (or Just The Bay Area), Washington-Baltimore, Norfolk-Virginia Beach, Tampa-St. Petersburg.
I just don't see Atlanta being hyphenated with Decatur, Sandy Springs, Marietta or Roswell..
Atlanta is THE Hub of the region.

[DeaconJ]

Originally Posted by lilmusket

The only US cities that could arguably be sidekicks would be Minneapolis-St. Paul, Dallas-Ft. Worth, San Francisco-San Jose-Oakland (or Just The Bay Area), Washington-Baltimore, Norfolk-Virginia Beach, Tampa-St. Petersburg.
I just don't see Atlanta being hyphenated with Decatur, Sandy Springs, Marietta or Roswell..
Atlanta is THE Hub of the region.

There are others: Winston-Salem and Greensboro...Raleigh and Durham...each about 20 miles apart. Kansas City-Kansas City...Miami-Fort Lauderdale...Boston-Providence...Greenville-Spartanburg...Los Angeles-Long Beach...I'm sure there are some I overlooked.

[lilmusket]

Miami-Frt Lauderdale??? Not really... because Miami is so much larger.. a sidekick really needs to be of almost equivalent... I have never heard anyone trefer to Miami as Miami-Fort Lauderdale.. Same with Los Angles-Long Beach... those two cities are no where near of equivalent size... how many times have you heard Los langeles referred to as Los Angeles-Long Beach?? hardly ever. Now you have a point with Greenville-Spartanburg, and Raleigh-Durham. But to fit this definition the two cities really need to be of equivalent size (such as in twin cities) or very near in size and have their own core downtown areas. Kansas City is an interesting example... Yes there is a Kansas City, MO and a Kansas City,KS.. but the core urban area is Kansas City, MO... Kansas City, KS is mostly suburban with virtually no downtown core, and you'd have almost no idea you were in a seperate city... like you do in Raleigh-Durham, Washington-Baltimore, and Minneapolis-St. Paul.