City of Vista Grove: Here We Go Again (Atlanta, Sandy Springs: home, college)

[Clayton white guy]

We want to keep our Clayton County!

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by Clayton white guy

We want to keep our Clayton County!

Don't worry, you will--except for Rough and Ready/Mountain View.

And you will get College Park, East Point, Hapeville, and unincorporated College Park (and a possible extension of the panhandle to the south).

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by primaltech

And none of the very suburban and mostly quiet area of this Vista Grove should be in Atlanta, but the few neighborhoods deliberately left out if it, should be.

Atlanta should totally annex those areas. I think it's great that these initial "suburban" areas have really become "intown" neighborhoods due to the metro's growth. They really are an extension of the CoA.

And remember, Northeast Atlanta (NW DeKalb) is the developmental sister of Southwest Atlanta--and Southwest Atlanta is an integral part of the CoA.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by Gulch

Not having to deal with the disaster that is DeKalb County government (though I do think that the annexations that aries4118 was proposing are way too much). I certaintly don't think that the CoA needs to shrink (which is lunacy).

The proposed annexations are not way too much.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Why though? What possible benefit is it other than making Atlanta "bigger?"

OK, I'll bite:

1. The proposed annexations are natural extensions of the CoA. Natural extensions of our multi-nodal, poly-centric city--Perimeter, Cumberland, Emory/Northlake, etc. These areas would've been annexed if not for Georgia's weird annexation laws.

2. The proposed annexations keep powerful corporate players as part of the culture and political fabric of the city (Home Depot, UPS, etc) which is important. They will have a firm stake in the city's well-being (which helps the metro as a whole) and not just be part of some upstart suburb or unincorporated morass.

3. The proposed annexations expand the political demographics to truly represent urban/semi-urban Atlanta. Currently and for the most part, the whites of the CoA are Buckheadites and eastside liberals (from yipster to crunchy). Expanding to Northeast Atlanta, Vinings, Sandy Springs, Dunwoody, and Chattahoochee Hills brings a more "middle political" demographic in the white people sense. Moreover, expanding to the southwest and a bit to the southeast increases the CoA's black middle class (currently shrinking) which brings much-needed black political balance instead of just brahmin/elites and the working and/or underclass.

4. When you are traveling within the proposed annexations, it just "feels" and "screams" Atlanta--Perimeter, Cumberland, NW DeKalb, Vinings, Cumberland, etc. It is strange that these areas are not in the city. They are not currently in the city due to Georgia's antiquated and corruption-inspired annexation laws. Additionally, as I mentioned in a post above, Northeast Atlanta (NW DeKalb) is the developmental sister of Southwest Atlanta. I think the only reason this area was not annexed was that it was "less seamless" considering that is in a different county.

5. As stated in #1, Atlanta is a multi-nodal and poly-centric city--which is wonderful. The proposed annexations would bring some cohesiveness to the multi-nodal/poly-centric character of the city. For more on this, read through this link: https://www.atlantaga.gov/home/showdocument?id=30594

6. There is a lot of initiative in the CoA right now to make a great city--and people are realizing the unique assets that make Atlanta what it is. The proposed annexations are natural extensions of those assets and they go along very well to CoA's long-range plan. More here: https://www.atlantaga.gov/home/showdocument?id=30594



You may notice that I did not mention anything about getting "bigger," ideal population, or some percentage of the metro's population. The areas need to be annexed because they are natural extensions of the CoA while enhancing and expanding the CoA's unique assets. Moreover, the CoA would become a healthier city proper which would make for a healthier and consistently viable metro area/region.

[primaltech]

Atlanta’s 2 primary edge cities of Perimeter and Cumberland don’t ‘scream Atlanta’ at all- they scream suburban edge cities. Because that’s what they are. They’re like Tysons VA or Redmond WA or numerous other examples. Most definitely not the same feel as the core city that they’re a job center ring satellite of.

And no it doesn’t at all feel strange that suburban Cobb is not in Atlanta proper, regardless of postal address. That’s a county seat city in a different county, with a natural river boundary between our 2 counties (the most logical political border around these parts).

The western edge of DeKalb County is different. That’s in-town, in the middle of ITP, right next to the core.

But not anything east of Clairmont, where it gets really suburban. I support a City of Vista Grove for that area. And I support Decatur annexations and possible other new smaller cities (not Greenhaven).

Atlanta’s population/impact issue is because of its extreme low density, not its geographic size. If Marietta or Lawrenceville had the same land area as Atlanta, they’d have close to the same population. Atlanta needs to look at zoning, and bulldozing some SFH. It has an over-abundance of houses, vs other uses.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by aries4118

OK, I'll bite:

1. The proposed annexations are natural extensions of the CoA. Natural extensions of our multi-nodal, poly-centric city--Perimeter, Cumberland, Emory/Northlake, etc. These areas would've been annexed if not for Georgia's weird annexation laws.

2. The proposed annexations keep powerful corporate players as part of the culture and political fabric of the city (Home Depot, UPS, etc) which is important. They will have a firm stake in the city's well-being (which helps the metro as a whole) and not just be part of some upstart suburb or unincorporated morass.

3. The proposed annexations expand the political demographics to truly represent urban/semi-urban Atlanta. Currently and for the most part, the whites of the CoA are Buckheadites and eastside liberals (from yipster to crunchy). Expanding to Northeast Atlanta, Vinings, Sandy Springs, Dunwoody, and Chattahoochee Hills brings a more "middle political" demographic in the white people sense. Moreover, expanding to the southwest and a bit to the southeast increases the CoA's black middle class (currently shrinking) which brings much-needed black political balance instead of just brahmin/elites and the working and/or underclass.

4. When you are traveling within the proposed annexations, it just "feels" and "screams" Atlanta--Perimeter, Cumberland, NW DeKalb, Vinings, Cumberland, etc. It is strange that these areas are not in the city. They are not currently in the city due to Georgia's antiquated and corruption-inspired annexation laws. Additionally, as I mentioned in a post above, Northeast Atlanta (NW DeKalb) is the developmental sister of Southwest Atlanta. I think the only reason this area was not annexed was that it was "less seamless" considering that is in a different county.

5. As stated in #1, Atlanta is a multi-nodal and poly-centric city--which is wonderful. The proposed annexations would bring some cohesiveness to the multi-nodal/poly-centric character of the city. For more on this, read through this link: https://www.atlantaga.gov/home/showdocument?id=30594

6. There is a lot of initiative in the CoA right now to make a great city--and people are realizing the unique assets that make Atlanta what it is. The proposed annexations are natural extensions of those assets and they go along very well to CoA's long-range plan. More here: https://www.atlantaga.gov/home/showdocument?id=30594



You may notice that I did not mention anything about getting "bigger," ideal population, or some percentage of the metro's population. The areas need to be annexed because they are natural extensions of the CoA while enhancing and expanding the CoA's unique assets. Moreover, the CoA would become a healthier city proper which would make for a healthier and consistently viable metro area/region.

The Atlanta City Design: Aspiring to the Beloved Community

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by primaltech

Atlanta’s 2 primary edge cities of Perimeter and Cumberland don’t ‘scream Atlanta’ at all- they scream suburban edge cities. Because that’s what they are. They’re like Tysons VA or Redmond WA or numerous other examples. Most definitely not the same feel as the core city that they’re a job center ring satellite of.

And no it doesn’t at all feel strange that suburban Cobb is not in Atlanta proper, regardless of postal address. That’s a county seat city in a different county, with a natural river boundary between our 2 counties (the most logical political border around these parts).

...

No. You are wrong. They totally "feel/scream" Atlanta. Remember, Atlanta is a multi-nodal/poly-centric city. You have to think outside of your American "must be like NE/Midwestern cities" box.

Cumberland/Vinings is definitely more "Atlanta" than suburban Cobb. I'm an East Cobber, and I should know.

Moreover, when forming and enhancing Atlanta, I'm not thinking, "See, just like such-and-such in such-and-such metro." That's not visionary, that's not forward-thinking and it's very obtuse. Let Atlanta be its own thing that works well with its unique assets.

Originally Posted by primaltech

...



The western edge of DeKalb County is different. That’s in-town, in the middle of ITP, right next to the core.

But not anything east of Clairmont, where it gets really suburban. I support a City of Vista Grove for that area. And I support Decatur annexations and possible other new smaller cities (not Greenhaven).

...

East of Clairmont is not-too-different than West of Clairmont. They flow seamlessly into each other. This is the future borough of Northeast Atlanta (to be annexed by the CoA). It is also the developmental sister of Southwest Atlanta.

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by primaltech

Atlanta needs to look at zoning, and bulldozing some SFH. It has an over-abundance of houses, vs other uses.

No! Absolutely not. Atlanta's SFH neighborhoods are untouchable, and need to remain that way. They are a unique and beautiful asset that sets us apart from other cites. There is plenty of room to densify all over the City and along our major corridors.

I'm definitely an advocate for allowing granny flats and increased density in neighborhoods that desire it, but the wholesale destruction of SFH neighborhoods is off the table.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by JMatl

No! Absolutely not. Atlanta's SFH neighborhoods are untouchable, and need to remain that way. They are a unique and beautiful asset that sets us apart from other cit[i]es. There is plenty of room to densify all over the City and along our major corridors.

I'm definitely an advocate for allowing granny flats and increased density in neighborhoods that desire it, but the wholesale destruction of SFH neighborhoods is off the table.

I totally missed that primaltech wrote that.

Spot on, JMatl (and kudos to the bolded/underlined above). Atlanta's SFH neighborhoods are definitely untouchable. And yes, ADUs is the way go in Atlanta and to-be-annexed Atlanta.

https://www.curbed.com/2018/1/16/168...development-us

https://www.planetizen.com/news/2017...-having-moment

A Market Solution for Affordable Housing: ADUs | Kronberg Wall Architecture Design Development Atlanta

https://www.constructiondive.com/new...change/442321/

http://thenext10.org/wp-content/uplo...ng-Element.pdf

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/adu.pdf