U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > South Carolina > Greenville - Spartanburg area
 [Register]
Greenville - Spartanburg area Greenville - Spartanburg - Simpsonville - Greer - Easley - Taylors - Mauldin - Duncan
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 11-11-2010, 12:06 PM
 
4,414 posts, read 3,229,093 times
Reputation: 2319

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swande View Post
Again, you seem to be misconstruing my argument. If someone dumps a million gallons of toxic chemicals on their land, and those chemicals leach into the groundwater aquifers which are used as potable water, of course that constitutes a negative externality and the person then has no legal right to dispose of said chemicals on their land. However, clearing a piece of property of trees to make way for pasture or grassland certainly does not mean it is a negative externality if you drive by and look at my property. If you don't like it, don't look at it. Let me just say that I love trees. I preserve them any chance I get. However, such ought to be an individual choice, not the imposition of the collective.
"Don't look at it" isn't much of a legal argument. Especially since how you choose to use your land has a direct affect on the enjoyment and value of the other landowners within your community. Health, safety and welfare out-weigh your ability to do as you please with property. That said, you can certainly clear property, for pasture, logging etc. It's just that many governments require you to meet certain environmental (mostly run-off prevention) and neighboring property protection (mostly screening and noise mitigation) standards.

The OP is very much correct that unchecked sprawl has some very real negative consequences. Increases in infrastructure costs, loss of farmland, greater commute times, loss of mobility for the young and old, depression of housing values, and numerous others. There is nothing unconstitutional, or wrong about seeing communities develop in an orderly and systematic fashion.

I'll have to do some research where this is happened before, but a region should not be decreasing population density while increasing population. Such a trend is going to make new development less attractive and more expensive over the long term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2010, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Not where you ever lived
11,544 posts, read 25,134,520 times
Reputation: 6189
This is an excellent topic for the Urban Planning Forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 06:15 PM
 
Location: New York City
1,556 posts, read 3,091,783 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
This really hits on one of my biggest issues with this area: there is virtually no regulation of growth/sprawl around here. New strip malls and Wal-marts are built while old, abandoned, dilapidated strip malls lay idle. New taxpayer-subsidized subdivisions have been built while older existing homes have been for sale for years. EVERYONE should be concerned about this, no matter their political ideology as unencumbered sprawl affects everyone negatively. Your home values won't rise when there is no scarcity of land to be developed. Apparently a few people are happy with leaving tiny sections of 'Nature' to be protected along the outskirts of our community, but we really all live in nature whether we realize it or not. What we do to our environment effects us, our quality of life, and the future for our kids and their kids.

Greenville/South Carolina is about 20 years behind other parts of the country in realizing that we can't just "develop" the land around us willy-nilly. You have to be smart about it, plan it to some extent. There are consequences to this unregulated sprawl: General Ugliness for one, depressed land and home values, air pollution, water pollution, waste of money/resources, lower living standards, etc...
You are right on point regarding this. The house I purchased in Greenville has not gone up so much as $1,000 in value since I purchased it a few years ago....totally stagnant. Greenville property tax bill just arrived and it is higher then it was a year ago!

It is all about supply and demand....if the supply of land is controlled and better regulated.......then the demand for the land/homes that are available will increase along with the values....then and only then will homeowners in Greenville see their home values go up. As long as anybody that wants to purchase land can purchase and build wherever they feel like the sprawl will continue....and so will depressed home values.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 08:46 PM
 
4,382 posts, read 6,088,024 times
Reputation: 1569
Home values are actually fairly stable here. Values are amongst the highest in the state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2010, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Anderson, SC
181 posts, read 348,419 times
Reputation: 180
Another interesting perspective about development from Brookings
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2010, 11:58 AM
 
Location: New York City
1,556 posts, read 3,091,783 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Brian View Post
Another interesting perspective about development from Brookings
Excellent article...thank you. Transportation does help drive real estate demand which is the reason that NYC is so expensive to live in....it is very walkable and there is plenty of. transportation. Article also reminded me of the other issue I had when I lived in Greenville.....railroad tracks all over the place that can easily connect Grennville, Mauldin, Simpsonville, Greer, Fountain Inn and then could go even further and connect it to Atlanta and Charlotte. However I will be shocked if commuter trains EVER make it to Greenville because it would take tax increases to accomplish it...many of the residents in Greenville are allergic to tax increases. On the other end of the problem downtown Greenville is quite small....everyone cannot fit in a 26 sq mile area....thus the reason that most of Greenville's residents live in the areas outside the city limits. If a commuter train does eventually happen then the sprawl will not be such a damper on home values.

If they follow a park and ride model like we have here in Westchester county and Long Island then people will be able to drive their cars to the train station, park it, purchase a train ticket, head to their destination and when they return pick their cars up and head home. All of the shopping, restaurants and other conveniences could be built around the train stops....this way when people arrive at their
destination everything is located in a walkable distance. Not to mention the positive impact this would have on Greenvilles economy with
the hundreds if not thousands of city jobs (conductors, train mechanics, ticket agents etc.) that would be created. In this case the abundance of land that is available in Greenville would be a good solution to solving the sprawl problem while offering the kind of space needed for this kind of development.

Last edited by NewYorkBorn; 11-16-2010 at 12:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2010, 07:25 PM
 
4,414 posts, read 3,229,093 times
Reputation: 2319
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkBorn View Post
Excellent article...thank you. Transportation does help drive real estate demand which is the reason that NYC is so expensive to live in....it is very walkable and there is plenty of. transportation. Article also reminded me of the other issue I had when I lived in Greenville.....railroad tracks all over the place that can easily connect Grennville, Mauldin, Simpsonville, Greer, Fountain Inn and then could go even further and connect it to Atlanta and Charlotte. However I will be shocked if commuter trains EVER make it to Greenville because it would take tax increases to accomplish it...many of the residents in Greenville are allergic to tax increases. On the other end of the problem downtown Greenville is quite small....everyone cannot fit in a 26 sq mile area....thus the reason that most of Greenville's residents live in the areas outside the city limits. If a commuter train does eventually happen then the sprawl will not be such a damper on home values.
Only problem is public transportation and commuter rail only really work when you have enough popultion density. Seeing how the metro area is actually thinning the usability of rail, no matter how needed, may not be very high. That said, when you have the right kind of zoning (usually form based instead of a restrictive use-based code), densification can be promoted at large transit stops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 02:09 PM
 
Location: Greenville, SC, USA (mostly)
5,408 posts, read 13,334,250 times
Reputation: 2426
Here is a great article on the subject from a business perspective:

Back to the City - Harvard Business Review
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:19 PM
 
57 posts, read 93,903 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
I am not a legal scholar. But under your reasoning the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act, etc. would all be unconstitutional. However, they are not. They all affect what you can do with personal property because what an individual does affects everyone else. Very conservative courts agree with this notion.

My parents have property in Texas and are required by law to keep a certain percentage of the trees on their land.

I own property in Colorado and am required by law to keep a certain percentage of the trees on my land.

Such laws are common in the U.S. because what we do as individuals affects those around us. We do not live in millions of individual bubbles. If I dump millions of gallons of fertilizer on my land, it effects and hinders the rights of those around me, especially those downstream. Same goes with cutting down all the trees, albeit to a less-obvious extent to the more ignorant people of this world.

An easy comparison is the Freedom of Speech. You can say what you want in America, but that does not give you the right to cause the panic that would result from screaming "fire" in a crowded movie theater.

If you want a piece of deforested land, buy one. But if you want to cut down parts of a forest that has been here for thousands of years, and the destruction of said forest affects the well-being of those around you (as it does), that should be the subject of reasonable regulation.
I agree with you. My neighbors cut down the woods between our homes, now we have erosion problems and mud flowing in our yard. When we asked why they did this they said oh we didn't think of how it would affect you, sorry. We have spent the last two years planting new trees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:43 PM
 
1,283 posts, read 2,159,685 times
Reputation: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odell195 View Post
I agree with you. My neighbors cut down the woods between our homes, now we have erosion problems and mud flowing in our yard. When we asked why they did this they said oh we didn't think of how it would affect you, sorry. We have spent the last two years planting new trees.
Along those same lines, why didn't you have trees before?
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:



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 > South Carolina > Greenville - Spartanburg area
Similar Threads
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