Why does Atlanta get a bum rap on "sprawl?" (Marietta: condo, homes)

[bizchick86]

I've been seeing talks about Atlanta's sprawl around C-D lately, and I've got a few questions:

-How is Atlanta different from other major metros with vast suburbs? I love San Fran, for instance, but just hop across the Golden Gate bridge and you'll find hoods identical to Kennesaw, Norcross, and other Atlanta suburbs. And it's not like San Fran is super populous (only about 800k living in the city as opposed to Atl's 500k) why don't they get the "sprawl" treatment?
-What exactly is at issue with "sprawl?" Is it the fact that the metro covers a large area and people don't like it?
- Why would Atlanta get a reputation for being spread out when, really, it's cities in the metro not named Atlanta that have the characteristics of sprawl cities (strip malls, parking lots, etc)?
- Why do people care anyway? What's wrong with having easy parking at places you frequent? And who places these value judgments that a parking lot is worse than having parking meters charging you 25 cents every 15 minutes and driving around for hours because there's nowhere to park?

Just some general questions that I've been pondering. Your insight?

[noah]

Simply because there was no growth management plan and growth was at the whim of developers. Many communities develop master plans and limit what they consider bad growth. Simply clear cutting and building like crazy is not always in the best interest of an area.

[BeyondInfinity]

Originally Posted by bizchick86

I've been seeing talks about Atlanta's sprawl around C-D lately, and I've got a few questions:

-How is Atlanta different from other major metros with vast suburbs? I love San Fran, for instance, but just hop across the Golden Gate bridge and you'll find hoods identical to Kennesaw, Norcross, and other Atlanta suburbs. And it's not like San Fran is super populous (only about 800k living in the city as opposed to Atl's 500k) why don't they get the "sprawl" treatment?
-What exactly is at issue with "sprawl?" Is it the fact that the metro covers a large area and people don't like it?
- Why would Atlanta get a reputation for being spread out when, really, it's cities in the metro not named Atlanta that have the characteristics of sprawl cities (strip malls, parking lots, etc)?
- Why do people care anyway? What's wrong with having easy parking at places you frequent? And who places these value judgments that a parking lot is worse than having parking meters charging you 25 cents every 15 minutes and driving around for hours because there's nowhere to park?

Just some general questions that I've been pondering. Your insight?

I also think a lot of it has to do with jealousy! The sunbelt states population is increasing at a much higher rate than other cities and many companies are moving here too; therefore, the other regions are hating on us! That is just my opinion.

[reet4587]

As a native to the metro area, I've seen so much in the way of beautiful, natural spaces get eaten up by unchecked, sprawling development. The spots around Marietta where I used to pick blackberries with my grandmother for her preserves and cobbler are all gone and turned into subdivisions. The awesome space in east Cobb County where I went with my grandfather to catch snapping turtles in a pond -- and view a rusty old moonshine still that was long abandoned, is also sprawling subdivisions.

The road where we used to go during occasional snows to see the expansive, tiered cow pastures look like wedding cakes in the snowy dust is now the ugly, congested Barrett Parkway commercial nightmare.

So many developments could have been made more compact with less surface parking so that the natural beauty of the area could have been spared. But there was no one in charge of preserving the land and enforcing smart growth. You have to drive so far now to see anything that resembles the landscapes I remember.

I respect the fact that most people don't want to live in a high-density situation, but for the sake of preserving space for native plants, animals and landscapes, I think we could have managed to squeeze in a bit with some medium density.

[noah]

Moving Beyond Sprawl: The Challenge for Metropolitan Atlanta - Brookings Institution

Online NewsHour: How We Live -- April 30, 2002

http://home.uchicago.edu/~ecoslor/pdf/atlanta_paper.pdf (broken link)

Sprawl makes driving mandatory and trips longer; residents of sprawling
communities drive three to four times as much as those in better-planned communities.

Critics argue that the city took the wrong path 30 years ago when it started to deal with the
growing population by building roads and homes without adequate long-term thinking;
the city only developed a regional planning commission after years of runaway growth in
the suburbs.

[bizchick86]

My thing is those cities where there is sprawl are in other counties and are politically independent with their own planning boards, commissions etc. How is the city of Atlanta supposed to control the planning of Cobb and Gwinnet or the minds of voters in these counties who voted specifically to eliminate signs of urbanity?

To me, that's like Manhattan being blamed for strip malls and traffic in Long Island. The areas are distinct and separate. I could see this argument for neighborhoods in Atlanta in Fulton County, but this isn't adding up when it's other counties with independent plannning boards who've made these decisions. Someone help me out, because you guys are still describing other cities outside of Atlanta's jurisdiction that exhibit most of these features.

Further, most urban centers don't have miles and miles of an urban core. Manhattan is on a tiny island. San Fran is in a small space as well. I can't even imagine high density neighborhoods stretching from Atlanta to Kennessaw, which, really wouldn't even make sense. Every major city has its suburbs. And whether they're in D.C., Frisco or Chicago, they all have the same features. How is Atlanta different?

[noah]

Suburbs here were not well planned -- roadwise, walking wise (no sidewalks many times) and had restrictions on how close retail and such could be to residential. It seems even urban planners believe intown Atlanta is too spread out although i think in recent years areas like Midtown have changed that perception.

[BeyondInfinity]

Originally Posted by bizchick86

My thing is those cities where there is sprawl are in other counties and are politically independent with their own planning boards, commissions etc. How is the city of Atlanta supposed to control the planning of Cobb and Gwinnet or the minds of voters in these counties who voted specifically to eliminate signs of urbanity?

To me, that's like Manhattan being blamed for strip malls and traffic in Long Island. The areas are distinct and separate. I could see this argument for neighborhoods in Atlanta in Fulton County, but this isn't adding up when it's other counties with independent plannning boards who've made these decisions. Someone help me out, because you guys are still describing other cities outside of Atlanta's jurisdiction that exhibit most of these features.

Further, most urban centers don't have miles and miles of an urban core. Manhattan is on a tiny island. San Fran is in a small space as well. I can't even imagine high density neighborhoods stretching from Atlanta to Kennessaw, which, really wouldn't even make sense. Every major city has its suburbs. And whether they're in D.C., Frisco or Chicago, they all have the same features. How is Atlanta different?

Atlanta is not different from the other cities you mentioned. It just happens to be in the south which many people seem to hate for its history and past. Atlanta is making great strides though, to have more of its population move back to the city, which is a great thing in my opinion.

[bizchick86]

Suburbs here were not well planned -- roadwise, walking wise (no sidewalks many times) and had restrictions on how close retail and such could be to residential.

But which suburbs are? You look at the suburban areas of any major city and they're all like that. Again the biggest cities in the world all have this. And again, how is Atlanta different?

It seems even urban planners believe intown Atlanta is too spread out although i think in recent years areas like Midtown have changed that perception.[/

The city of Atlanta is not a high-density megapolis, no doubt, but what it is certainly ain't sprawl. Atlanta's city planners and developers are working double time trying to bring density to the city with mixed use neighborhoods, high-rise developments, mid-rise condo buildings, and guess what, many sit half empty and depreciating.

I think the city can only move so far as the people want it to move. If people in metro Atlanta are not moving into the city, can we really fault Atlanta for that? That's veering off topic, but it is something to consider.

The point still remains, how is Atlanta's sprawl different from anyone else's sprawl. All major cities have suburbs just like Atlanta's with high traffic getting into the city, land pollution, parking lots, and strip malls. You can drive 20 minutse outside Manhattan and San Fran (I mention them so much because I have actual experience living in NYC and visited family friends outside San Fran) and see strip malls, cookie-cutter homes and the like, so it confounds me how those cities aren't nearly as villified.

[bizchick86]

Originally Posted by ck26

Atlanta is not different from the other cities you mentioned. It just happens to be in the south which many people seem to hate for its history and past. Atlanta is making great strides though, to have more of its population move back to the city, which is a great thing in my opinion.

ck, I might have to agree with you. I don't really know what else it could be.