ryanmckibben

Oh the irony

Or better yet, form a new state. North Georgia...the 51st state.

The article was in the AJC. I tried to find it, but to no avail. I do remember that one was a Dem ans one was a Rep. Apparantly there are a couple differnent projects that this ruling effects, and they are located thgroughout the state.

I read that two state reps have proposed a bill that would seek a constitutional amendment allowing school taxes to be used for TADs. If it passes the GA then it would go to the voters next fall.

If I ever compare Streets of Buckhead (I can't believe that the marketing people didn't realize it would be shortened to SOB!!!) to Atlantic Station, it will only be because of my concern about the totality of the project. The architecture may be different, but the fact remains that a large area of higt density real estate will be developed my a single entity at relatively the same time. The potential to see that urban Disneyland feeling that is so prevalant in AS is a very distinct possibility. I realize that there are far worst tragedies in the world then an entire area being all shiny and new, but I maintain that the best way to create an authentic environment is to let it occur naturally. Why did Carter have to buy the entire area, and redevelop it all at once? Was one multi million dollar high rise just not challenging enough???

It's the proposed 15th st bridge not 13th st. There has been talk of capping the connector in that area with a park, but at this time that's all it is...just talk. As far as the buildings go, to my knowledge none of those are actual proposals from anyone. The only thing in that area that I have heard of is TWELVE Midtown but that has at best been postponed.

Welcome to Atlanta my friend!

I promise you maverick I am not mad. You and I actually agree on quite a bit. If you were to go back and read some of my other posts you would know that I am probably much more pessimistic on the future of our oil supplies then you are. For years I advocated the building of mass transit into the burbs. What i have come to realize is that transit does not and will not work in the suburbs, at least American suburbs. They are simply too diffuse to make any real difference in either traffic congestion or energy use. Automobile suburbs are a historical anomoly, and I fully believe that our childrens children will look back at the way most of us currently live as a time of unbelievable waste. Daily life as you know it (and I am assuming that you live in said burbs based on some of your posts) is not possible without cheap oil. As you have said yourself the time of cheap oil is rapidly appraoching, some would say it is already here and that we are merely playing symantics with the budget by calling the war in Iraq defense spending instead of what it is, oil protection money. Unfortunately, I see no real alternative to oil on the horizon, not even close. But...back to the topic at hand... You are erroneously assuming that most or even the majority of people commuting out of Cobb and Gwinett are coming into the city. If all of the commuters on 75 and 85 worked in MT or DT then you would have already hit on the perfect solution...kind of. Even with that scenario, how do people get from their house to the station or from the station to their office? Unfortunately, most commutes are from suburb to suburb where the above problem gets even worse. The only place that transit has a chance of gaining real traction is in the urban areas of our city. If you would like to know more about why, I would suggest reading "How Cities Work" by Alex Marshall. I want to stress to you that I am not opposed to transit, in fact you will have a hard time finding someone that believes that the car is as big of a problem as I believe it to be. I am however opposed to spending billions of $ on transportation systems that will not achieve the desired results. You say that streetcars are merely ornamental, I would argue that only in the urban areas of our region (Buckhead, MD, DT, Decatur, Marietta) does transit have even a prayer of achieving what you want it to. Ultimately, suburbia is dysfunctional and I see no reason to invest billions more to perpetuate a style of living that is ridiculously wastefull and already unbelievably subsidized. Here's to city living!!!

You can disagree all you want, the fact is that once you get outside of the urban core, even in NY, the percentage of commuters that use mass transit is in or just above single digits. As for the rest of the world, show me one country, just one, whose built environment is as dispersed and auto oriented as ours. Canada would probably be the closest and even they really aren't in the same league. I can guess the cities that you would tick off as the examples of "extreme" sucess stories of commuter rail. NY, DC, San Fran, Chicago. You can't compare them to Atlanta. They are a different type of city. All of those cities I just mentioned have ring cities with clearly defined cores of their own. Atlanta does not. No matter how much you wish it to be so, transit will not work make any discernable difference in traffic in a city like Atlanta, at least not into the forseeable future. And yes, I favor rebuilding the streetcars system in Atlanta over helping to solve the commute problems of someone who moved to BFE and then wonders why it takes him/her so long to get to work. Why should we as a society make multi billion $ investments so you can live in the middle of nowhere??? As far as practical goes, the only place transit has a hope of capturing more then just a token ridership is in the urban core. And the only real traffic issue facing this region is the assumption that people can choose to live wherever they want and then expect society to pony up the money to make their life convenient.

Some would. I could show you a million studies that say most will not. At least not without a more convenient way to get to their final destination. At a projected cost nearing a billion, yes billion, $$$ I don't think the benefit comes close to warranting that kind of investment. The money would be better spent rebuilding the streetcar system in Atlanta. The reality is that most suburban commuters will not use mass transit, not because they don't want to, but because it is impracticle in a suburban environment.

...I should clarify... It's not the entire side of the building that is concrete block, just the base of the building. The problem is that Macs Beer and Wine is not tall enough to hide it.

Take a picture of the back side and you'll see that there is no...zero...finish on that side. It is nothing but exposed concrete blocks. It looks pathetic.

^All that sounds great, but I would question whether the Belltline was the catalyst for all 50 of those projects that are currently under way.

Does that mean the name of the airport will revert to Hartsfield Atlanta International?

The thing I'm tired of is having a thug as a QB. They, whoever they are ( as if the establishment even had the time and inclination to coordinate a witch hunt for Vick), are not picking on anyone. When he finally grows up , realizes he doesn't live in the 'hood anymore, and generally starts acting right, "they" will stop picking on him. In my opinion, we traded the wrong player when we sent Schaub to Houston.

Dobbins AFB wold be the best choice in my opinion. It can already handle large planes and the neighbors are already used to the noise, so politically it would be the easiest sell. And...didn't the DOD consider shuttering Dobbins anyway?

Looks like Vinings. My guess would be Overlook.

What's it like up there on your perch? You seem to have everything all figured out. Your example of a nation that has forsaken consumerism is absolutley perfect. I'm sure that being run by a nut job dictator has abosolutely nothing to do woth North Korea's current state of affairs. If only Gucci or Prada or Land Rover would open a store all of their problems would disappear, but what else can be expected from someone whose rebuttal rests on "You're a communist"? I half expected to see a nanny-nanny boo boo somewhere in your post. Also unsuprising from someone as self righteous as you come off as, you missed the entire point of my arguement. I have no problem with the consumption of goods and services. My problem is that we are literally consumed with consuming. So much so that consumer debt is at it's highest point ever, even when adjusted for inflation, relative to income. We, both individually and as a nation, are spending ourselves into ruin. As for your claim of communism, isn't if kind of funny that the worlds largest communist nation holds roughly $8 trillion in reserves, while the worlds largest capitalist nation has roughly the same amount in debt? But your right, nothing to worry about...keep spending.

I saw the same article, and to me, what is most impressive about Atlanta'a growth ( and I mean city) is that is is being fueled by domestic citizens instead of immigrants. All of the big cities, NY, Boston, Chicago, San Fran, all would have lost population in that time period if it weren't for immigrants. I think that speaks to the strength of Atlanta's revitalization.

Serbia was not about oil. I never stated that all wars ever fought have been about oil. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, you should be able to make the connection fairly easily. If not, please read the history of American/Saudi relations. With regards to the news media, I would say they have not paid as much attention to the energy situation as they should. If one wants info on the subject he/she must dig for it. I could recomend a few books if you would like...

^ That's my point. People who defend this way of life in spite of the overwhemling evidence that it will lead to a crisis are just plain irresponsible.

With all due respect Sparten, my view is not pessimistic, but realistic. If you doubt that the industrialized world will go to war to secure ever shrinking amounts of energy, all you need to do is turn on the nightly news. Do you honestly think that we would give a rats ass what was going on in the Middle East if there was no oil underneath all that sand??? Without that "black gold" they are sitting on, there would be no multi billionaire Saudis, Dubai would be just another desert backwater, and we would care as much about the Middle East as we do Africa now. One only need to look at the supply demand projections of oil consumption to realize that sooner or later (and I fear sooner) something MUST give. Given that reality, do we go on advocating the status quo simply because that is what the "market" wants? Or do we start to come to the realization that our "American way of life" is ultimately unsustainable, and start to make the choices to place ourselves on a stronger footing? The longer we wait to make those choices, the more draconian they will be.

Honestly Sparten, it was all I could do to leave my post as short and to the point as it was. What i really wanted to say, has been said a million times before and I have a feeling I would be preaching to the choir. It is staggering to me that some people still advocate that the careless and excessive use of natural resources should be allowed, if not downright ecouraged, simply beacuse it is what the market wants, regardless of what the implications may be. Last time I checked we have to share this world with all the other countries on the planet...well, actually, I guess we don't, but if we choose not to, we will come to look at current global situations as the good ole days. War will become a permament part of life, the draft wil be reinstated, defecits will eventually cripple the economy as military spending doubles or even triples. See, the market has a hard time factoring in externalities like the one I just gave. If we could find a way to include those expenses into the supply/demand charts, I wonder if the market might start to change. Oh, yeah...I think I heard somewhere that it was bad for the environment too.

Please stay in North Carolina