The Persistence of Failed History in Urban Atlanta: “White Infill” and "Gentrification" as the New “White Flight?" (Decatur: public schools, income)

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by aries4118

But, Brother Marks, this is not just a minor drawback. It could become a serious consequence.

See my previous post. It has been that way for some time for middle class families with school age children. Most of my life in fact. My brother and sis in law got a house in Candler Park/Lake Claire area when they first married.... I am talking late 70s when it was not the trendy area it is now (side note... drove by it when I took my mom to Emory on my recent trip home... now a half million dollar craftsman style house sits on that lot...). When they got in the family way, they left. Fine inexpensive neighborhood for them (at the time) but not a good school situation, so they went to Cobb.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

If you want a combination of good schools, safety and bang for the buck, I don't know where you can find any of the three in abundance in the city, no matter what your ethnicity. It works for singles but with more than 1 kid? I just don't see it on a middle class salary.

Maybe our definitions of middle class are not eye to eye. I have a graduate degree but not in a field that makes anywhere close to 6 figures. We could not find the combination of safety, schools and square footage for the dollar anywhere in Atlanta that I found in Cobb.

Well, it is relative. One of our kids and her husband live in a gentrifying area on the east side of town. They are both teachers, although she is at home now that they have two kids. They love it over there. I'd say their economic status is fairly typical of their neighbors.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

See my previous post. It has been that way for some time for middle class families with school age children. Most of my life in fact. My brother and sis in law got a house in Candler Park/Lake Claire area when they first married.... I am talking late 70s when it was not the trendy area it is now (side note... drove by it when I took my mom to Emory on my recent trip home... now a half million dollar craftsman style house sits on that lot...). When they got in the family way, they left. Fine inexpensive neighborhood for them (at the time) but not a good school situation, so they went to Cobb.

Perhaps.

But it also depends what one wants in terms of house size, etc. and what one considers a "good school."


My point is I don't want Metro Atlanta to become an "either-or" type place--and/or where the city only houses the rich+affluent.

For example, in Metro Boston, the choice of where a family lives in the metro is made based on their income--unless your are in the rich class then you can live anywhere.


I still think Metro Atlanta gives singles, families, couples, empty-nesters, etc. multiple options of where to live for a wide range of income--and to live with quality. Whether hyper-urban, urban, semi-urban, inner-suburb, mid-suburb, outer-suburb, exurb, or semi-rural...the choice is yours!

I hope this doesn't change.

[afonega1]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

An interesting point in the article: Poverty rates have remained the same in Chicago even with the influx of wealthy whites.

This tells me that middle class blacks are moving in great numbers to the formerly all white suburbs. I see this as a positive step, not a backwards step. I am sure many younger, upwardly mobile blacks are renovating and moving into formerly depressed areas as well.

I don't see how any progress is made by the central core being minority and whites living in the burbs. While core cities are losing their high percentages of minorities, the suburbs across the board are seeing a rise in minority populations, many times in very dramatic percentages.

Why is this not a good thing for everyone? The only drawback I see is our city centers are increasingly beoming polarized... Poverty or wealth. Where is the middle ground for the middle class?

I agree with you a hundred percent.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by lastminutemom

We have talked about his before. Toomer isn't diverse. Outside of Pre-K, there are virtually no white students. This year, for example, 23 of the 54 white students were in Pre_k, leaving another 31 in grades k-5. Based on the data, it seems like many white kids are in pre-k, but don't continue onto K. (Does Toomer host other schools' pre-ks.) For example, in 11-12, there were 33 white children in pre-k and the next year there were 13 in kindergarten.

I think it is important to be careful how we portray things.

Toomer pre K is open to Kirkwood and East Lake first, then overflow from Mary Lin. That's where the big drop in white kids is from as they return to their exclusive enclave NOD.

[fzx]

Originally Posted by aries4118

I think Toomer does get Pre-K from other schools.


Toomer, for example (at least a few years ago, probably now still), became a popular alternative for those that could not get into Mary Lin's Pre-K.


About the 31 in grades K-5, lmm. Aren't they concentrated, though, in the primary grades (K-2)--thus showing a coming wave of white students? Not sure--I don't have the data right in front of me...


And 13 white students in kindergarten is a lot for a school like Toomer...a very small school.

Toomer's rise in white students is following the same model that happened in CSD (specifically Clairemont) in the mid-1980s to late-1990s.

Wow! It is really encouraging to see the trend. Although singles/DINKs/seniors may likely be the pioneers venture into the inner city, we do need young families with school-aged kids to stick around to make a difference. The problem may lay on the middle school. I can imagine some leave due to the middle school. Can new comers continue the gentrification trend? The neigbourhood will not reach a sustainable level until either side reaches a critical majority. Hard to tell, really.

Personally, I have a one-year old in a so called good elementary school district. We probably will stay for another 10 years before making a decision.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fzx

Wow! It is really encouraging to see the trend. Although singles/DINKs/seniors may likely be the pioneers venture into the inner city, we do need young families with school-aged kids to stick around to make a difference. The problem may lay on the middle school. I can imagine some leave due to the middle school. Can new comers continue the gentrification trend? The neigbourhood will not reach a sustainable level until either side reaches a critical majority. Hard to tell, really.

Personally, I have a one-year old in a so called good elementary school district. We probably will stay for another 10 years before making a decision.

And that is why APS is exploring K-8 at Toomer.
Middle school years are a tough age for kids.

[earthlyfather]

As empty nesters, about to be retirees, we considered in town Atlanta. But the comparatively high property taxes ended that thought. The burb counties, like Cherokee and Forsyth, as well as others, value their seniors years of education tax support, largely eliminating them. A several hundred dollar, per year property tax bill, versus several thousand per year bill is nothing to be trivialized. So, this middle class couple can't afford to live in town, even though the good points you all point out are attractive. Bloated bureaucracies in government and education, not to mention heavy unionization of employees both add to the costs of government, that have to be supported somehow, some way.

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by aries4118

Perhaps.

But it also depends what one wants in terms of house size, etc. and what one considers a "good school."


My point is I don't want Metro Atlanta to become an "either-or" type place--and/or where the city only houses the rich+affluent.

For example, in Metro Boston, the choice of where a family lives in the metro is made based on their income--unless your are in the rich class then you can live anywhere.


I still think Metro Atlanta gives singles, families, couples, empty-nesters, etc. multiple options of where to live for a wide range of income--and to live with quality. Whether hyper-urban, urban, semi-urban, inner-suburb, mid-suburb, outer-suburb, exurb, or semi-rural...the choice is yours!

I hope this doesn't change.

I know Atlanta is better than many other cities in this regard and I too hope this stays in place. But the city has always been more expensive than the burbs.

When we were first married and returning to ATL with the first one on the way (early 90s) I really wanted to be in the city. The spouse wasn't as keen and would only be happy in Buckhead. We were NO WHERE near being able to afford Buckhead at the time. We visited some friends in Ormewood and she would have none of that even tho I thought it would be exciting.

A few years later when it was time to upgrade, we got a huge 4/2 ranch on a full finished basement with a mother-in law suite (made it a 5/3 actually) that we rented out for over half our mortgagte... for $50k less than what another friend paid for a 2/1 cottage near Piedmont Hospital. When our quiver was full (4 kids) there just wasn't an option in the city. By that time we were both working in Cobb, so no real need.

All that to say "I hear ya...."

[equinox63]

Relevant Reposts: 1 & 2

//www.city-data.com/forum/atlan...ypothesis.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/atlan...-happened.html

Two relevant throwback threads for a fresh, new set of eyes. Just food for thought.