Atlanta City Council approves moratorium on tree removal (Decatur, Mount Vernon: top neighborhoods, houses)

[cqholt]

Until next year, developers are banned from removing more than 10 trees from any residential parcel five acres or larger in the City of Atlanta

https://atlanta.curbed.com/2017/6/30...ial-areas-2017

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cqholt

https://atlanta.curbed.com/2017/6/30...ial-areas-2017

This is why Atlanta is bad for anyone without connections or massive amounts of money.

A long term moratorium is a bad idea. People are frozen and can't do things.

If it was for a couple of months, that would be one thing. That is understandable so people don't rush out and clearcut to avoid a future rule. But 6 months will kill a lot of projects.

And somehow, I bet people with connections will get an exception.

[jsvh]

I support updating the tree ordinance, but a moratorium like this only will constrain the housing supply more.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I support updating the tree ordinance, but a moratorium like this only will constrain the housing supply more.

Or push development on surface parking lots

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Or push development on surface parking lots

That would be great!

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Or push development on surface parking lots

It will do that also. But it will still constrain the supply of developable and thus the housing supply as well.

Saving trees is great, just remember it has a cost, and that is higher housing costs on all of us.

[Thulsa]

Originally Posted by jsvh

It will do that also. But it will still constrain the supply of developable and thus the housing supply as well.

Saving trees is great, just remember it has a cost, and that is higher housing costs on all of us.

You are right about that.
But I want to rephrase it.


Quality of life has a cost.
There is no absolute need for trees, parks, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and suchlike things that improve our quality of life. They do come with a cost through increased taxes and higher housing prices.
But the higher housing costs are not due to the cost of providing these things. There are due to the price competition between people who want to live in places that provide a better quality of life.
I'm fine with paying more to live in an area that is esthetically pleasing, not only from seeing trees, but also having all the small life, birds, squirrels, etc, that come with having trees.


There are other things too, such as the building murals we see around town, Decatur's traffic control boxes and those developers that make an effort to build something better to experience than a brick bunker.
They make life more pleasing, and they are driving up housing prices. Fine by me.

[jsvh]

I agree Thulsa.

I think trees have value too and a smart tree policy is a good thing a worth the costs.

I question this "moratorium" as part of a wise policy, but overall I think they should have something in place to protect trees.

But yeah, my bigger point is housing affordability is a growing concern that we need to be conscious of. Things like safety building codes we certainly want to keep most around, but other things that add costs to housing such as requiring a minimum amount of parking or setbacks we need to be very strategic in how we apply them.

[Thulsa]

Originally Posted by jsvh

But yeah, my bigger point is housing affordability is a growing concern that we need to be conscious of. Things like safety building codes we certainly want to keep most around, but other things that add costs to housing such as requiring a minimum amount of parking or setbacks we need to be very strategic in how we apply them.

So true, housing costs in Atlanta is a concern.
But there is plenty of very affordable housing in Atlanta. We just don't want to live there.


But I think in many in-town areas such as Emory/Decatur, the only factor causing the high prices is quality of life desirability. The million dollar houses might be 250K anywhere else. This neighborhood looks good and is a pleasure to live in, and the only way to reduce prices is to reduce the quality of life in that area. I can't get on board with that.


I guess I don't have a problem with the existence of expensive areas to live in.




Slightly changing the subject ...
That being said, there are some extreme distortions in some areas such as around Decatur.
Look at this 1.3 million Oakhurst house.
1010 Adams St, Decatur, GA 30030 - realtor.com®


And this 1.4 million Decatur one.
177 Mount Vernon Dr, Decatur, GA 30030 - realtor.com®


Those are nice houses, but ...


Compare those with what you can get for 1.5 million near the Atlanta History Center
3196 Andrews Ct Nw, Atlanta, GA 30305 - realtor.com®
That's a very nice neighborhood, and it makes me think the Decatur/Oakhurst market is overpriced.


And now it occurs to me, I don't actually know what other people mean by "affordable housing".
I was thinking, base it on what a police officer or teacher makes. In Atlanta The average is about 52K.
That puts someone at being able to afford a little less than 200K.


But within walking distance of the Andrews Ct $1.5 million house, there are 34 units for under 200K.
They're small, though. There are a few in Decatur as well. And these are top neighborhoods.
Are we talking about affordable housing for the actual poor?