Is the Beltline Bad for Atlanta? (White: renters, townhomes, transfer)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

It isn't really simple or fair just characterize someone as a rich yuppie for doing that.

CW, sorry about my "rich yuppie" phrase. That isn't fair and it sounds contemptuous. Most yuppies are simply hardworking young people who have decent jobs and they are far from rich.

However, relative to those who have been relegated to poverty in disinvested urban neighborhoods for the last 30 years, these youngsters may indeed seem rich and privileged. They are moving to town because they want to, not because they have no other choice.

And once they get there, they often set about changing things to their liking. Fixing up houses, improving schools, reducing crime, adding walkability and so forth. For those who lived there before them, those things may not have been an option.

[red92s]

The Beltline is more than just the 3 miles that is already complete.

Too bad we have this overcrowded, racially insensitive, glorified sidewalk in our city. /sarcasm

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by arjay57

CW, sorry about my "rich yuppie" phrase. That isn't fair and it sounds contemptuous. Most yuppies are simply hardworking young people who have decent jobs and they are far from rich.

However, relative to those who have been relegated to poverty in disinvested urban neighborhoods for the last 30 years, these youngsters may indeed seem rich and privileged. They are moving to town because they want to, not because they have no other choice.

And once they get there, they often set about changing things to their liking. Fixing up houses, improving schools, reducing crime, adding walkability and so forth. For those who lived there before them, those things may not have been an option.

But the flipside to this for me...

is many in the lower and lower-middle class are moving out of town too. Part in that some are getting out priced from neighborhoods, but also in part because they are fast growing population in need of more housing units and good schools too.

Just as people moving in town are pushing them out. People moving into some of the suburban neighborhoods are pushing me out socially, because I don't see others my age living in the apartments my sister (considerably older than me) lived in just 15 years ago. I see mostly families. Also, with the destruction of the housing projects and use of Section 8, many poorer families are choosing cheaper apartments in the suburbs in part, because they see it as a better quality of life and better schools and success for their children. However, that also pushes out younger singles out of the apartments in suburbs.

Of course, that is largely because I'm single and tend to want to follow and want to congregate around others who are as well. I often feel like I have to pay more to live in an area of mostly singles, than the way things were 15 years ago.

But, I will say in the grand scheme of things it is helping strike an equilibrium. No longer is most the poverty just concentrated in the city a) holding the city down and b) letting the suburbs ignore the problems and not have to pay for the problems.

Gwinnett won the Broad prize a couple of years ago... the main reason they cited for GCPS winning was their ability to close the education success gap between minority students and non minority students, as well as between low-income students and other students. So the trend isn't all bad at all, but that also doesn't mean there aren't concerns. Job access in all parts of town is a concern, luckily there are many jobs throughout our suburban areas as our job base is very decentralized.

It is also a concern to me how small some of our counties are and are vulnerable to concentrated problems... I'm especially thinking about Clayton and potentially Rockdale Counties. Some would say Dekalb, but at least Dekalb is often counter balanced by alot of nice areas too.

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by DTL3000

I think the Beltline being hailed as the next best thing to the Second Coming is arguably bad for Atlanta. As it is, I think a lot of folks are setting themselves up for disappointment. It should be viewed first and foremost as another way of getting around town and not some earth-shattering project that'll transform Atlanta. Just get the damn thing done first.

I think you just see it as transit thing maybe a park thing too. But the projected itself also includes new urbanism and etc. This is why it's such a long term project.

Below PDFs of masterplans
Master Planning // Atlanta BeltLine

Originally Posted by arjay57

Yes, but people are being forced to give up their historic homesteads, basically so a bunch of rich yuppies whose ancestors fled the city in a panic can now move back in.

It's not illegal but where is the justice? Say I move into your neighborhood and you all bolt because you think it heralds the arrival of an army of old geezers. 30 years later is it fair for y'all to just move back in?

I used to be against gentrification then I thought about. I can tell you right now people don't want to live in the hood, if given the chance of socially mobility most would had moved anyways. Poverty shouldn't be bunch together in the first place. And those who had lived in these neighborhoods during good times want the value to go back up. Diversity is a good thing, I understand if the demographic was completely replace but I don't think that's the goal. The only issues I have are A, where are the people going? I remember speaking to my dad about gentrification in Chicago he said, people where being push into these unwalkable suburbs with no trasit, which is really bad. And B, the new residents should honor the character and history of that neighborhood, give a make over don't take a way it's soul sort of speak.

[ARaider08]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

How is gentrification a bad thing?

Why would be want to keep economically blighted areas in the city core from improving?

Makes no sense.

Great post cwkimbro.

People only view it from the racial perspective. Yes, it displaces people of lower income but it does improve the living conditions of cities. I do believe that gentrification is a good thing for cities to rebound but when it necessitates eviction of other peoples it becomes controversial. What needs to happen is increasing the wealth of those communities. Unfortunately, not enough people do so other people take over and replace them.
Gentrification is sticky on the ethical side. If people in those neighborhood actually had the means to invest in their own neighborhoods and grow the value of in-town neighborhoods then conditions would improve. But the problem is many of those individuals make less than $20k/year, live in crime ridden conditions and many cities would rather these areas rot than actually improving the conditions. And by cities, I mean the people of the cities, not the city governments.

[testa50]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

Then I have even less pity because you don't need to go through the hassle of selling before moving.

If you rent, you could afford a place before it got nice. That doesn't mean you have the right to keep affording it because others came in and did a lot of hard work and made it valuable.

The reverse is also true. If you live in a place that starts to go to the dogs, the rent will decrease and you can either stay in a declining area to save money or move on to another area that is nicer that you can afford.

You aren't entitled to have a location freeze in value the day you move there.

I'm just responding to the idea that people who are forced out of gentrifying neighborhoods end up profiting from the situation. They usually don't, assuming they rent. The rent just keeps going up or the landlord sells the dwelling and tells the tenants to leave. Owners might turn a profit on the other hand.

That's not to say what's happening is right or wrong. It's a difficult issue, hence the debate.

[Ant131531]

The Beltline is one of the only things I see positive coming from Atlanta in the future. While it might not be 'earth shattering', it will improve many areas inside of this beltline including the downtown area of Atlanta. The areas inside the beltline will see much densification and gentrification if they haven't already. It will be an easy way to get around to the most interesting parts of Atlanta like Little Five points, Virginia Highlands, Piedmont Park/Midtown, Lindbergh area, etc, etc without having to use your car.

It seems to be very tourist friendly with a light rail transporting passenger across town. I expect new restaurants and businesses to open up along with this beltline...who knows, areas on the beltline could become centers for nightlife.

There is honestly so much possibilities with this beltline that we have not explored and so much that can happen along this: Museums, attractions, theaters, performing arts centers, etc, etc all easily accessed through lightrail or walking!

The person in the article seems to be looking at this one-dimensionally. Yes, unfortunately, people will be driven out of their neighborhoods, but change happens in cities and as the city becomes more and more desirable to live in and immediately around it, those areas that were already close to the core will see changes too in demographics. This is how cities develop. This is how cities become great.

For the sake of the future of Atlanta, something like this needs to be developed and in the long-term, I only see great things coming out of it.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Yes, but people are being forced to give up their historic homesteads, basically so a bunch of rich yuppies whose ancestors fled the city in a panic can now move back in.

It's not illegal but where is the justice? Say I move into your neighborhood and you all bolt because you think it heralds the arrival of an army of old geezers. 30 years later is it fair for y'all to just move back in?

^This whole post is wrong. Even if my parents fled the city 30 years ago (which they did not), *I* didn't flee the city. I have every right to live wherever I damn well please, guilt free, so long as I can afford the rent or mortgage.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by JPD

^This whole post is wrong. Even if my parents fled the city 30 years ago (which they did not), *I* didn't flee the city. I have every right to live wherever I damn well please, guilt free, so long as I can afford the rent or mortgage.

This is the same type of thinking many blacks have with the idea of reparation and that the whites should repay back their sins their ancestors committed over a hundred years ago.

Why people think this way, I'll never know, but it's wrong and you should not hold accountable generation or generations after the event took. It's a very naive and ignorant idea.

[testa50]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

This is the same type of thinking many blacks have with the idea of reparation and that the whites should repay back their sins their ancestors committed over a hundred years ago.

Why people think this way, I'll never know, but it's wrong and you should not hold accountable generation or generations after the event took. It's a very naive and ignorant idea.

It must be nice living in a world with only right and wrong, black and white.