Loading ...
Does Peachtree Corners really need to be a city?
The United Peachtree Corners Civic Association would like to make Peachtree Corners a city. The association is asking the Gwinnett delegation to the Georgia General Assembly to support legislation that would enable the residents of Peachtree Corners to vote on incorporation. This all begs the question: Why? Does Gwinnett County need yet another small city? Do the residents of Peachtree Corners need another layer of government to create additional cost and complexity for them and for those trying to do business and serve the residents of the city? I say resoundingly, no!
State Rep. Tom Rice said that the association wants to be a “city light” and have three main services: “planning and zoning; code enforcement; and trash service.” I must admit, after the Gwinnett County’s socialized garbage debacle, I can understand the desire to have greater control over trash service. However, the last thing Gwinnett needs is an addition to the patchwork of zoning jurisdictions and code enforcement authorities. This adds complexity and, in turn, cost for businesses that have to deal with yet another jurisdiction as they try to serve local customers. Given the reputation of many small-town zoning boards, this additional layer can result in desirable businesses being prevented from opening shop in these communities. If businesses cannot serve a community, residents suffer by not having sufficient local amenities. Also, as happened in Milton, GA, potential revenue shortfalls are even possible if enough commercial taxpayers are denied access to the area.
Hopefully, the Gwinnett delegation will not give into another unneeded small city in metro Atlanta. It seems to me that these newly created small cities are primarily good for setting up a police department to generate revenue by running speed traps on the roads and highways in their city. Gwinnett already has Duluth and Lawrenceville engaging in excessive traffic enforcement. County residents and visitors who travel in the Peachtree Corners area do not need to deal with another. Say no to Peachtree Corners, GA.
Tags: business, garbage, Georgia General Assembly, government, incorporation, Milton, Peachtree Corners, police, Tom Rice, traffic enforcement, United Peachtree Corners Civic Association
Related Posts
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:24 pm
I would say that if the residents of Peachtree Corners vote in favor to form their own city, so be it.
However if this is just a scheme to solicit and siphon tax money from the county or state through earmarking and grants, forget it. We have enough welfare from bottom to top.
February 3rd, 2010 at 9:34 pm
sorry but got to disagree with you on this one. Having grown up in metro Atlanta I have seen up close and personal what happens to unincorporated areas that wait too long to incorporate until the political and economic ground shifts under their feet. It took Sandy Springs over 35 years to incorporate and Dunwoody many, many years as well. What was the common theme with those two? Their respective county leadership changed in quite dramatic fashion over just a few years and started redirecting resouces toward parts of their counties that had put new leadership into office. When these two areas attempted to incorporate their campaigns were castagated in their worst ways as selfish, racist, elitist, etc. Gwinnett is where DeKalb was maybe 20 years ago. The times are a changing. Within 5-10 years if not sooner the political leadership will begin to reflect the very diverse composition of our county and as a result resources will begin to shift to areas that this new leadership feels is underfunded just as they did in DeKalb and Fulton. Taxes will go up to fund the “needs” of these constituents and Peachtree Corners will end up on the losing end of that deal. The argument about traffic tickets is nothing but a red herring. I drive up and down PIB literally thousands of times a year through Duluth/Norcross/Chamblee/Doraville and NEVER have a gotten a speeding ticket. If Peachtree Corners wants to be able to control their destiny and avoid being a sugar daddy for other parts of the county we best incorporate before the political landscape of both Gwinnett and Georgia changes. Better to pay slightly higher taxes now and get control then wait and pay much higher taxes down the road and have NO control.
February 5th, 2010 at 1:35 am
[...] Gwinnett Buzz -Does Peachtree Corners really need to be a city? [...]
February 5th, 2010 at 2:28 am
awright, you make some valid points about protecting the Peachtree Corners area from having funds generated by its residents siphoned off to other areas of the county on a regular basis. I would say that we all do that to a degree - we all helped build an unnecessary baseball stadium in the Mall of Georgia area - your scenario is well taken. As for the speed trap point, no that is not a red herring. I work in Alpharetta and regularly pass through Johns Creek and those guys seem have taken a page out of the Duluth traffic enforcement playbook. Is that why Johns Creek needed to be a city so they could camp out on State Bridge filling city coffers? I have seen similar efforts, though even more egregious, by Sandy Springs with city cops patrolling I-285 and GA 400. Are city cops really providing much needed and previously lacking protection to the residents of Sandy Spring by running speed traps on major state and federal highways such as those? Of course not - they are raising revenue. As such, if Peachtree Corners were to become a city, I would only support it with the stipulation that there be no city police force and that the new city contract with Gwinnett County for police protection. Gwinnett does not need another Duluth or Lawrenceville police department.
February 15th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
The claim is they are only interested in those items that would keep up the life style values or something like that. The real issue was when the City of Norcross was trying to annex Technology Park, Peachtree Corners then would threaten becoming a city. Norcross to my knowledge is at least at this point not threatening to annex Technology Park and has dropped its plans for annexation.
I believe it was Bert Natusi who last year said that this was NOT a good idea to try to become a city, but now that he is retiring, it appears this is a “good idea”… go figure.
To make PC a city is not only a poorly thought out proposal, but it will cost FAR MORE than is PROJECTED. Logic, if logic were being used would say “why in an economic recession would we want to start a city or city lite, because it inherently will cost more money”.
If we are doing this to provide ONLY 3 Services and ONE is trash pick up, then don’t we have trash pick up now? What are the other two services that the “city lite” are going to provide? I have been unable to find that out what the other two services are. So we are going to invest not only in surveys’ but feasabilty studies and who knows what else to simply say that we are SEPARATE from NORCROSS. WHY? The real reason should be told about this purposed NEED for a PCC.
What is the REVENUE base for this, is it small and medium business who are struggling, is it mostly homes? How many services does th county provide that we are still going to need? Once any type of new government is established someone has to be an administrator etc.,etc..
The problem is GA unlike any other place I know is that very few are caring about the good of the WHOLE, e.g., a state with 159 counties…get real.
February 16th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
“Constituents in unincorporated areas aren’t the only residents to worry about tax implications forming a city. Property owners in new cities typically end up with higher tax bills because the services the new city provides end up costing more than anticipated. People do want local control. It’s predictable and understandable. What they don’t calculate is the increased cost of a new layer of government.”
This is a quote I found on line regarding the formation of the new City of Dunwoody. Along with the new cities of Milton and Johns Creek, they all promised a “city lite”, but then grew quickly, adding services and employees to the municipality. The new City of Milton it now boasts over THIRTY full time employees. The residents have no say over an increase in property taxes, just the elected officials do, and who trusts a politician today to look after the people’s interests and not raise taxes?? We will be told that our property values will decrease if we don’t form a separate identity from “those people” in Norcross, whoever “they” are. We have lived in this area since 1984 and have no complaints regarding the level of services provided by the county. Many of us are approaching our retirement years with fixed incomes. Do we want to pay higher property taxes that could increase each year just to become the “Buckhead of Gwinnett County?” Don’t be convinced by fear of what others predict…property values have dropped because of the economy, not because of diversity.
An UPCCA board member wrote me stating, “If there were an annexation this community would start a slow decline and that equates into property values. Just check property values in City of Norcross and those in Peachtree Corners. There is no doubt at all that this would happen. It is why the majority of business owners in Tech Park was not in favor of being tagged as part of Norcross. Our homes are the single largest value most of us own.”
Sounds like the sky is falling, the Russians are coming, and doom and gloom is outside our door if “those people” –diversity whether it be Blacks, Asian, Hispanics, or good gosh, Libertarians or Democrats have input in the future of the area. Is annexation a bad thing if more of us share the cost of taxes and other services?
February 16th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Jody,
You may have lived in the area since 1984 and not had any complaints. That speaks well of the leadership of the county over all that time I suppose. However, there are massive changes coming in the makeup of the BOC and once that happens I suspect you may very well see those changes that you are so confident won’t happen. I used to live in South DeKalb in the late 70s and early 80s and I have relatives that have lived in south Gwinnett since the early 80s and both those areas have seen massive declines in their standard of living (crime, schools, property values, etc) and a large reason was their inability to control zoning. Those areas declined over 30+ years through good times and bad times so your argument about declining property values due to the economy does not hold water. If recent history is any guide then rest assured that once the political winds shift your property values will take a massive nose dive if you do not have the ability to control zoning. You mock the criticisms about “those people” but facts are stubborn things. As an area becomes more diverse in certain ways the reality is that in most cases important indicators of economic vitality like crime, school test scores, commercial rental rates, property values, etc. tend to turn negative. It is a fact. Compare crime in DeKalb in 1980 and today. Compare school scores. Do the same for south Gwinnett. Hell, just drive through those areas. DeKalb County used to be the crown jewel of Georgia in almost any way possible and now large swaths of it are crime ridden and run down and I would put to you that its government is dysfunctional at best. The same is happening to south Gwinnett. It is a fact. Once the BOC starts to reflect the diversity of Gwinnett there will no doubt be calls from areas that these new leaders come from to have more funding diverted for their “needs”. Not a criticism it is just human nature but once that happens Peachtree Corners will have a snowballs chance in hell of incorporating because we will be nothing but an ATM to fund poorer areas of the county. Once that happens the county will not be able to “afford” for us to incorporate because there will be no other way to pay for the “needs”. Look at Sandy Springs and Dunwoody. Both those areas waited too late to incorporate because they too were satisfied with their services but the political winds shifted (i.e. the BOCs in their respective counties changed) under their feet and when they tried to incorporate it was too late. In the aftermath they spent decades fighting to incorporate and in both areas they where inundated with developments (i.e. apartments and low quality commercial development) which they did not want but they could not stop because……. that’s right… they were not incorporated. The results are commercial corridors that are now eye sores and crime ridden. You could make the same argument for Peachtree Corners Circle on the southern side of Holcomb Bridge. It is unfortunate that certain types of diversity result in economic decline but it is a fact. I wish it were not but it is. I cannot do anything about that but I can do what I can to ensure my house and neighborhood do not go the way of areas that declined because they did not have control of their own destiny. My house is a major investment for me and I do not want its value destroyed. I know too many people in south DeKalb and south Gwinnett whose literally had to sell their homes at fire sale prices in order to move before their neighborhoods became total ghettos and in some cases these were really nice homes. I would rather pay an extra $10, $20, $50 per month in tax now and retain control with the resulting stability in home values then wait five years and have my taxes go up anyway once the BOC changes to fund other “needs” in south Gwinnett and not have any control. Regards.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:57 am
awright, as I said before, I do see some logic in your arguments. However, I must take exception to part about not wanting nor being able to stop “apartments and low quality commercial development.” First, unless you are the property owner or are MATERIALLY IMPACTED by the development of property for such uses, you have no right to tell that owner that they cannot economically benefit from such development. As for whether such developments were wanted, apparently they were as there was a market demand for the services they provided. Were there not, there would have been no economic impetus for such development and such businesses would have failed in the long term. While I see the point you are making regarding “quality” development and I prefer such development myself, I have a greater taste for protecting our property rights and that means that I may not like all things that go on one another’s property. I think that, while zoning can have an impact as you describe, there are many other factors that contribute to the decline of area and zoning could be an effect and not even a cause in some cases I would imagine.
February 17th, 2010 at 6:32 am
If Peachtree Corners becomes a city, there’s no going back — we will have no say about taxes being raised and some folks may lose their homes because they can’t pay higher taxes! Some of the elderly on fixed incomes already own their homes outright and can just pay for upkeep and maintenance. It’s hard to believe that we will only pay less than an extra $100 a month…the new city will grow needing extra employees, police force, etc. I have confidence that the people will decide if fear of what might happen is worth trusting in more government and higher taxes.
February 17th, 2010 at 8:43 am
I wonder how many folks posting here ever attended a basketball game at Norcross High School during the last three or four years. They would be surprised at the wonderful mix of diversity — folks of all colors and backgrounds cheering for Jodie Meeks, Brenton Butler, Al Aminu and Gani Lawal. It’s interesting especially watching when Norcross plays South Forsyth — an all white male basketball team and all white female cheerleading squad. The Norcross High School cheerleaders boast representatives from all backgrounds - white, Asian, Hispanic and Black - just like the real world we live in. If our kids can successfully deal with diversity day to day in their schools, why can’t we as a Peachtree Corners community welcome businesses and development by diverse cultures? Awright fears diverse, ethnic neighbors who will allegedly diminish his property value.
School segregation was outlawed in the fifties, and the Civil Rights Act and other legislation was supposed to encourage folks to be more tolerant. It’s difficult for Georgia natives to change, especially those with Klan ancestors. Prejudice and intolerance is learned — it’s taught generation to generation. There is diversity in the workplace, the doctor’s office, and where you shop — you should be able to tolerate it where you live. The fears of awright are similar to “the Russians are coming” in the fifties when kids had to climb under their desks during various drills. Telling folks that their property values will go down by including diversity in our community is nonsense and spreading fear and hatred. Again, our kids have found a way to get along with those of different backgrounds, cultures and religions — why can’t their parents be as wise?
February 17th, 2010 at 10:15 am
@awright Assuming that Peachtree Corners forms its own city with the proposed borders including the section of the southern end of Peachtree Corners Circle and other diverse areas, then wouldn’t this new city lite be just as diverse as Gwinnett, Fulton and DeKalb?
In other words, it would be a smaller version of those counties. Oh wait a minute, I noticed that the problem you site is: diverse leadership equals in the decline of “quality of life” and that you have seen it for decades here.
So, do you propose that we create a dictatorship in Gwinnett County whereby we lock out diversity on the BOC and install chosen leaders who are not diverse, thus killing democracy? If so, then you would propose we create Peachtree Corners whereby non-diverse leadership is installed?
Your arguments are rooted in latent racism which is the equivalent of fear of ignorance. No, I’m not calling you a racist. I’m sure you’re a hard-working individual who truly wants what is best for the area.
The true reason areas go downhill is that people move out the minute they see diversity moving into their neighborhoods. If people developed tolerance for diversity, then we would see that very diversity work. In essence there would be a balance so that neighborhoods wouldn’t go into decline.
Economic conditions are keeping hard-working, taxpaying folks like you to stay in your current homes. Let’s face it, you cannot move out right now. So, what’s the next best thing? Try to create another layer of government to keep diversity away from your home.
Your thoughts are the antithesis to democracy, free markets and freedom. Ronald Wilson Reagan would actually be disappointed in your close-minded worldview. You see, if you wish to create your vision of the City of Peachtree Corners, then you are impeding new markets, ideas and growth.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:12 am
typical. if you can’t dispute the facts regarding economic decline of an area when certain types of diversity become very high then lets just smear the messenger as being a bad person. Show me one, just one example, where an area’s schools improved, crime went down, jobs increased, etc. when an area became more diverse, particularly when the diversity came in the form of low income folks often living in apartments. Just one, please. You say “allegedly” diminish property values. What?? Again, I refer you to the examples I provided throughout the metro area over the last 30 years. That is not alleged. That is fact. You say I am using scare tactics but if I what I say is true how is it trying to scare people. It is reality. Dude, this area is already diverse. If I had a problem with it I would move to Forsyth County or North Dakota or somewhere besides Gwinnett County. I love where I live and I want to stay right here. I am not running from “diversity” but I will be damned if I am going to allow decisions to be made that will cause my house to go down in value. Here is a local example to show you have property values are impacted by too many apartments and no zoning. Look at home prices for houses in the Berkeley Lake elementary school zone and compare those to houses in the Simpson district. The same house will cost you a good $50k more in Simpson. Look it up. Why is that? Well, I guess it could be either all the people in Simpson are racist crackers who fear diversity or maybe they compare the school test scores and say I want my kid to go to the best school available. I went to a high school that was almost 50% minority and lived in town that was nearly 50% minority. I have traveled and worked around the world working in very diverse environments so don’t go lecturing me about being “afraid” of diversity like I am some backwoods cracker with a confederate flag on a truck or something. How is having control of one’s zoning fear mongering? Talk about fear mongering. You try to smear supporters of incorporation by implying that they are somehow associated with the klan, or support segregation or crap like that. What?? Lets deal in facts and data and not personal smearing. I want the value of my property to go up and not down. Historical data shows that increases in certain types of diversity cause property values to go down. If you can provide data to dispute that assertion than bring it on. I also find it interesting that you imply that this is an issue unique to Georgia or the South. My assertion about areas declining based on increases in certain types of diversity and apartment building have played out all over this country for the last fifty years. I assume you are not from here based on your condescending attitude about the natives. I suspect if we knew where you were from and it was a large metro area we would find the same type changes playing out there as well. It is not a story unique to Gwinnett or Atlanta my friend. I have lived up and down the east coast and every large city I have lived in it is the same. People want to live where there is low crime and good schools. When a lot of apartments are built (no zoning control) and low income folks move in the area declines. Here is a non southern example for you to chew on - Prince George’s County in Maryland used to be a very nice suburb of DC. Now it is a near dsyfunctional mess. Why did it happen? Look it up. You’ll see. Your story about basketball at Norcross High School is nice but it does nothing to challenge the facts of what will happen if we do not get control of our zoning in this area.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:27 am
First, I am glad to see a lot of discussion on this issue. This is what I had hoped for when I developed this site!
As for the example of people looking at test scores and wanting to live elsewhere and that, in turn, negatively impacting property values, I would make two points. First, as I said in an earlier response, there are many factors that go into property values, not just that one. Second, even if that assertion is true, what is your solution? Do you not allow low performing students to attend schools? Do you prevent these students from getting an education because too many of them can bring down your property values? You continue to cite apartments. Is there some direct correlation between poorly performing students and apartments? A friend of mine used to live in an apartment and her son is quite bright. And how does all this square with property rights? You have a right to your property and you have a right to retain that value. However, does that give you the right to expect that people of some category (in this case, low performing students) can be excluded from other property in an area? Direct causation, I can see, but indirect causation gets a lot trickier.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:32 am
talesfromthecorners,
you make a good point…. the proposed boundaries would create a city that is “diverse”. Correct. The issue is not diversity in of itself but the type of diversity. Lots of low income housing (i.e. apartments) create a decline in social conditions. I’ve yet to see anyone provide data to dispute that. Hell, even the federal government acknowledged that concentrating lots of low income people together is bad for the area. Why do you think they created the Section 8 housing laws? Why do you think they are tearing down public housing across the country and spreading low income folks around as much as possible. Because statistics show that high concentrations of low income folks together in apartments or public housing creates problems. It is a fact backed by statistics. Zoning will not keep away diversity. It will however prevent any unchecked zoning decisions that will result in high concentrations of low income people that create social decline. What is the outrage about this? These are all facts that I have yet to see anyone dispute. It is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Anyone that brings it up gets smeared as bad so as a result there can never be an honest and open discussion about things. How is the helpful?
On a side note I find it interesting that you have insight into why I have not moved or why I have stayed. You say economic conditions keep me here. Who the hell are you to make such a statement? You don’t know me from a rock in the road. I have seen Atlanta change dramatically over the last 30 years and one of the things that has become apparent is that you cannot run from diversity. The white donut around the black city is done. People cannot keep moving further and further out to avoid diversity because commuting 60 miles is stupid on many, many levels. I’m not moving because I like where I live, I like my neighborhood, I like the area. I could sell my house for a good bit more than I paid for it but why would I move from an area that I like. I’m not going anywhere. I am going to stay and fight to make my area the best it can be.
And what the hell does Ronald Reagan and democracy have to do with this? I suspect Ronald Reagan would be in favor of local people making local decisions not having a BOC running a county with more people than many states making the decisions for them.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:44 am
Finance Buzz,
Thanks for your input.
Agreed that many things go into property values with school test scores being one of them.
Regarding people in apartments…. listen, I have spent many, many years living in apartments so I recognize that there are plenty of great, smart people living in apartments. To avoid writing an even longer post I choose to make broad generalizations about apartments but I am confident my assertions regarding the negative impact of overbuilding of apartments can be backed up by statistics. No one is implying people in apartments cannot go to school. Not sure where you got that from my comments. My point is that in general people that live in apartments when compared to homeowners tend to have socioeconomic factors that bring an area down - higher levels of crime, lower test scores, lower education levels, etc. This is not to say all people in apartments are bad. Of course they are not. Like I said I lived in an apartment off and on for years. It is to say however that if an area gets too many apartments (due to area not controlling its zoning) that the historical data shows that area will inevitably decline. Hell, look at the CIDs that have been created in Gwinnett. Those areas are in decline and they want to take some positive action (in this case businesses taxing themselves…. hmmm…. sounds familiar to what a city might do) to help prevent the area from decling further and hopefully turn it around. Just take a look at the Memorial Drive area today vs 30 years ago. If they had had some type of CID back in the late 80s maybe they could have prevented it from becoming a dump like it is now. Anyway, back to schools. The reality is that unless a city of Peachtree Corners created its own school system that the County BOE would continue to make all the decisions regarding school zone boundaries anyway so the point about PC zoning keeping people out of certain schools is a straw man argument.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
@awright But, you stated that “diverse leadership” is where the problems start.
Sure, you say that you don’t want to move, but if one reads between the lines in your posts, it looks like it would be an option if your worst case scenario came true. So, you may get all hot under the collar for my very correct assumption, but the fact remains that you would join scores of others that you have seen move over the years because of fear. You cannot run away from the fact that you stated these thoughts in your posts.
Indeed Ronald Reagan believed in local control, but he also believed in democracy. As it stands, your idea of Peachtree Corners wouldn’t involve the democratic process. Your vision would be: install non-diverse leaders who will keep out Section 8 housing.
In other words, you along with a few others in the area, would like to create your own enclave operated under an ersatz apartheid system.
Yes, the Atlanta metro area has changed dramatically over 30 years. You, along with other Peachtree Corners residents (read: UPCCA members), cannot handle that truth. So, you wish to set up this unnecessary layer of government under the banner of “protecting ourselves from them” and preserving your “quality of life.” I hope your writings are kept for the history books because they will be great examples of fear, ignorance and xenophobia.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
When diversity is paramount to quality, mediocrity will soon follow.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
awright, I did not say you directly said that certain categories should be excluded from a school district, however the implication is there. You imply that school test scores being lower would drive down property values. You also discuss zoning restrictions to prevent the type of housing that could attract these categories of residents. While perhaps this is not the same as excluding people, there is an element of controlling who lives in an area. But you fail to consider the property rights angle to this. That is my main concern. Unless there a direct causation of the use of one property on the your use and enjoyment of your property, how do we balance these competing sets of property rights. If Joe wants to build a 24-hour car crusher by your house - yes, that is a pretty direct cause of decreased utility of your property. However, if Sam wants to build an apartment complex five miles away in your community and there is no DIRECT negative impact to you, how much right do you have to say he cannut use his property in the most economically viable way?
February 17th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
So many of you have a crystal ball of doom and gloom for the future of Peachtree Corners believing that controlling zoning and businesses will control “undesirable diversity”. How about this scenario: what if in five years or so, retired NBA former Tech and Norcross High School basketball star Gani Lawal proposed to open a basketball summer camp or training center for young boys in Peachtree Corners? Will the City of Peachtree Corners (now all staffed by former UPCCA volunteers who decided they didn’t want to work for no pay indefinitely)find a way to keep this superstar from opening up a business because it would attract more diverse folks, even those from low income families? Gosh, my nail salon in Peachtree Corners is owned and run by all Asians; my favorite Mexican restaurant in the area is owned and run by all Hispanics. Fear of the future is no way to live. If you fear of what might happen, just go ahead and put your house up for sale and move to the City of Johns Creek, Milton, or wherever. You will be able to pay those higher property taxes that you claim you won’t mind paying…and you’ll get to do it sooner!
I thought the Tea party folks were all about “taxed enough already” and wanted less government and lower taxes.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
talesfromthecorner……
Newsflash…. zoning alone cannot stop Section 8 housing. Landowners determine if they want to participate in the Section 8 housing program.
As I have stated earlier please data to knock down my assertions regarding economic decline and their causes. You can call me all the bad names you want but as John Adams once said “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” Put up some statistics to disprove what I state instead of name calling and character assassination.
Apartheid… I love your comparison of a brutal system of oppression to a city wanting to incorporate that would have a population in excess of 30% minority. Again, people who cannot debate based on facts have to resort to this type of drivel.
Hey, here is another news flash for you. We have what is called the right of free association in this country. If I don’t want to associate with you I cannot be made to do so. If people want to associate together they can. If people want together and form their own city than that is their right and the voters will determine what happens. One of the problems in the country is since the 1930s the federal government has been trying to tell us what is good and what is bad in regards to free association instead of letting us exercise our rights as FREE MEN to associate as we see fit. If you want a city with high crime, crappy schools, bad roads then go form your own city or just stay in this spot,unincorporated, long enough and you will get it.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
@dewood Diversity enhances quality. Diversity equals enlightenment, competitiveness and economic and social growth. Cultural apartheid means the opposite of the aforementioned statement. Think about it.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
@awright No one is forcing you to associate with anyone. You may lock yourself in the house if you want.
However, no one has the right to engage in housing discrimination which, based on facts, has happened in our history. Creating this city gets around that fact.
Here’s a fact that you stated: the area is 30% minority. You would like to keep it at that and perhaps lower - based on your latent racist statements.
I’ll be fair and add “cultural” to the apartheid label.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Jody,
1) Tea party….. am I in the tea party? I must have missed my membership card in the mail. However, I AM for maximizing my investement which in this case is my house. If not wanting my house value to go down has become something to be ashamed of than our country truly has entered a period of irreversible decline.
2) What is this fixation with Gani Lawal? He “might” open up a bball facility…. Hey, bring it on. If it is a nice facility that is kept up and it does not create a negative influence than what is the problem.
You are fixated on the diversity in general instead of recognizing that certain types of diversity (low income folks in high concentrations of apartments) brings very negative socioeconomic consequences while other types of diversity (home owners who are educated and don’t commit crime…. which come in all colors) tend to improve an area. If diversity comes in the form of hard working immigrants who open businesses that employ people, that keep the property maintained and pay taxes…. bring it on. I suspect those folks own homes that they keep up and have a home environment that encourages education. Folks that own their own businesses and create value don’t normally live in run down apartments (or if they do they are saving to buy a house) and commit crime. Diversity is awesome when it brings improvement. However, diversity that most often comes in the form of low income apartment dwellers does not create businesses, or bring test scores up or in general make the area better. That is what I do not want.
As usual you present another straw man argument with your assertion that if I do not want diversity I should move to Johns Creek to live in a city that is all white. Johns Creek probably has a higher minority population % than PC (look it up if you don’t believe me, census.gov has lots of good info all the way down to neighborhood levels)does but those minorities (primarily Asians) do not live in run down apartments. They mostly own nice houses, own businesses and encourage education. Again, you try to present the argument as being against diversity in general. The diversity we are getting on PC Circle, all along PIB… in general it does not bring up test scores and improve property values. I again challenge you to provide data to prove me wrong.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
I have worked in many settings where diversity has been preached by upper management. I have yet to see the benefits of selecting a diverse candidate over a qualified candidate.
Proof of crime that emanated from apartment developments.
See
http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx?aid=237508c7-ead1-4de4-b7b2-b627abfee7fc
and zoom into you favorite apartment complex and see for your self the amount of crime.
You can also sign into scangwinnett.com and get a daily email of everyone arrested in a particular zip code and compared those arrest that live in apartments v. those how do not live in apartments.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
talesfromthecorner,
More straw man arguments…. HUD would be all over anyone trying to practice discrimination in renting or selling. You think a city of PC would be able to prevent the federal govt from enforcing those laws?? Please stop with these fictious scenarios.
I note the 30% minority level of a PC city to disprove another of your ridiculous arguments that incorporating is only to keep out “those people”. “Those people” are already here.
As I have stated if you can show me that having a high minority % that is based in low rent apartments does things like lower crime, improve property values, improve school scores, then please provide.
You have yet to provide data that shows that my assertions, however uncomfortable, are false. That is because they cannot be disproved. That is why you must resort to character assassination of those who are willing to state the obvious however much you may not like it. I make no apologies for wanting to encourage development that will improve the value of my home.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
@dewood @awright
So what do we do? Where do the apartments go? Shall we bulldoze and relocate the so-called dwellers to a Native-American reservation? This way, your homes’ values will increase and education will be top-notch.
@awright
Yes, you’re on the money about legal immigrant business owners. Don’t you think that we ought to inspire more minorities to become successful entrepreneurs? If we had a local gov’t committed to that as one of its ideals, then yes, I would buy into that. A democratic city that is committed to justice, a clean environment and a common-sense traffic plan is what we ought to have if we’re talking about a city. Right now, the UPCCA is not committed to that vision. It seems to be committed to, I hate to say it, “cultural apartheid” and a gov’t jobs program for some UPCCA folks.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
talesfromthecorners,
It has been good debating with you. I have to go take care of some business items. We’ll have to continue our discussion at a later time. Have a nice day.
Best Regards
February 17th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
Perfect solution: a gated community - the new City of Peachtree Corners. Change the boundaries to leave out all the apartments and let them remain in Norcross. Hire security guards at the numerous gates and issue ID cards — only the desirable and chosen can live, play and work in the new City of Peachtree Corners…
February 18th, 2010 at 7:11 am
What value will Peachtree Corners residents receive for an increased tax bill? What assurance do they have that “city lite” that is being proposed won’t grown into “city heavy” as costs go up, services are added, etc.? I don’t understand how creating a city out of an incorporated area will guarantee that low income folks won’t move into the area. No government can guarantee that…
What exactly will we get in return for paying higher taxes?
February 18th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Colleen-The idea of the city lite is being sold as an insurance policy for your home. In essence, the leaders of the city lite will protect your neighborhood through local control of zoning codes which will keep the riff-raff out.
If the UPCCA were open to an honest discussion at their next meeting, they ought to invite nearby cities that have incorporated recently including Johns Creek, Dunwoody, Sandy Springs who would obviously be positive. Then, they should have those who are opposed to cityhood. Perhaps invite established cities like Norcross and Duluth as well?
We need to have an open and honest discussion. The UPCCA seems to be one-sided on this issue and want to go full-speed ahead on the City of Peachtree Corners. If you see the posts by awright in this forum, you will see that he indeed brings out facts that studies show areas decline under certain conditions. I’m actually not arguing with the facts. I’m arguing the points that you bring up: what do we get for the extra taxes? Why tax us even more now in this economic recession? Why are leaders who call themselves “conservative” wish to raise our taxe$? Leaders who label themselves as conservative and wish to rai$e taxe$ ought to be voted out of office along with the other bums in the GA Legislature. We need to concentrate on attracting businesses and jobs here instead of a new expensive city.
February 21st, 2010 at 9:54 pm
There has been no clear explanation of what the benefits are to form a PC City Lite. The rationale to form the three cities mention was one of fear and was clearly stated as to “why do I want my taxes to go those people in the southern part of the County”.
The rationale used by awright is one that is based on fear as opposed to true foresight and vision. If one thinks that incorporating a little piece of the land that has no real revenue base other than homes and hoping that would keep out the “undesirables”, keep property values up, will improve your quality of life, you are wrong.
A true association of home owners would put pressure on the apartment and businesses owners to ensure that both rental and commercial property values stay up and enhance the attractiveness of this area. If awright could afford to move he would, diversity represents change to the status quo and “Change” frightens many people who fear they will no longer be in control.
Instead of finding creative ways to get more business that will be 21st Century business into the area, to attract higher paying jobs into this area and attract people who can afford to keep up their property,no we want to create an island where we would have to bear the COST to maintain.
All one has to do is to look at the make up of the people who attend the meetings and you say hmmmmm.
The creation of a city inherently creates another organization and bureaucracy and people who get salaries and benefits amd a host of hidden and unforseen costs.
If the services we are receiving are so poor such as safety, trash pickup, water, sewer, lights,road maintenance, etc., then why do we not approach the county and get those problems fixed.
Help me understand that if the residents of Gwinnett including some citizens from PC convinced the Commissioners NOT to raise taxes, why would we want to start a city and do what we did NOT want the county to do, RAISE TAXES.
The false assumption that exists believes that the creation of PC Lite would keep our property values high and keep crime out and would NOT be known as Norcross, which is no longer elite enough.
Please get real the way to improve the quality of life is to engage the change and format the change as opposed to run from it.
I noticed that the only minorities that appear to be acceptable are those who are Asian because they don’t live in “run -down” apartments.
I ask you who OWNS THOSE “RUN DOWN APARTMENTS”?
February 21st, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Mightylou,
1) I stay because I want to. I’m not going anywhere. I like where I live.
2) Diversity is great if it means low crime, good schools, etc. Lots of apartments don’t bring that. Sorry. Facts are facts. Look it up.
3) You think an out of town landlord who runs slums cares about the UPCCA who has no power? Wake up!
4) I wish that we could all ride unicorns, sing kumbaya and purple gum drops would fall from the sky but I, unlike some folks, live in reality and deal with facts not fairy tales and hope.
5) I don’t apologize for wishing to maintain the value of my property. I deal in numbers and facts and that info tells me minimizing apartments with folks that often do not emphasize things like education is a good move money wise.
6) You can either pay higher taxes now and have control (yes, a bad word I know) or wait and pay higher taxes later and have no control and be used like Dunwoody was for years as an ATM for Vernon Jones and company. Ulitmately this is the reason for incorporating. This is the vision part. Forecast into the future based on past history and not what we would LIKE to have happen.
February 22nd, 2010 at 6:51 am
Hey awright: Answer the following questions:
1. Where in Peachtree Corners is there land to develop and construct any additional apartments?
2. What do you propose be done with the existing apartments? Burn them down?
3. How will becoming a city control who moves into the apartments or buys a house in Peachtree Corners?
4. How will paying higher taxes ensure that you have more control? Zoning and planning can keep developers from constructing more apartments, but there’s no land to do so!
5. Where is downtown Peachtree Corners? Most cities have a downtown area, and I don’t see one here.
6. Why do you willingly trust the folks who are promising you an insurance policy against falling property taxes without examining the risks associated with forming a city?
Dunwoody homeowners may have to bear the brunt of lawsuit costs that may be brought against the new City of Dunwoody.
You state you want to minimize apartments. To accomplish this, you would have to rid the area of Peachtree Corners Circle dwellings - apartments and condos. How do you propose to do this?
February 22nd, 2010 at 9:25 am
I actually watched the Glenn Beck speech from CPAC this weekend. OK, as off the wall as Glenn is, I confess that he brings up a point that the conservatives in the area are abandoning. Glenn said that more government is a cancer and it is addicted to spending. The idea of Peachtree Corners ought to be called, “Peachtree Cancer.”
So, there will be a bloodbath in the midterm elections this fall whereby the GOP will probably reclaim the US Congress and many GOP members will be re-elected in Georgia. What’s going to change? To me, it looks like it will get worse under the Republicans who seem to be even bigger spenders. After all, this country barely survived one of its most liberal presidents: GW Bush. Yes, he expanded government more than any other president — Roosevelt and Carter included. Sure, the Dem president and Congress are attempting to spend their way out of this mess through “investments” in many sectors.
It’s time to just say no to more government and reform what we have at every level and reset our priorities.
If anyone is attending the UPCCA meeting this evening, tell Mr. and Mrs. Mason:
“Peachtree Cancer” is not the answer!
“Peachtree Cancer” is not the answer!
“Peachtree Cancer” is not the answer!
“Peachtree Cancer” is not the answer!
Amen!
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:25 am
Colleen,
1) Have you ever seen things get torn down? Just because there is a building on a site now does not preclude new development. That is how more apartments get built. That is also how apartments get torn down. Apartments get torn down when an area is so economically attractive that private capital moves in and tears it down and builds something better.
2. See answer above. Make our area more attractive and the apartments will go away. As usual no one has provided evidence to refute my assertion that high concentrations of apartments cause decline.
3. Control of our zoning will deter and discourage development that further erodes our quality of life. As I noted in point #1 if an area becomes increasingly attractive private capital will resolve these issues for us.
4. The proposed “city lite” will only provide limited services one being zoning. If the study is to be believed the cost will be about $10 per month on a $300k house. Not sure if you deal in numbers but if I have to pay $10, hell even $50 per month, to maintain my home value it is worth it especially if the alternative if paying nothing new now and having my house go down in value and then eventually have to pay higher taxes down the road when the BOC changes hands and taxes go up anyway. As far as your “there is no land argument” you keep repeating please see point #1. There are things called bulldozers that tear things down.
5) Downtown…. that is an argument against incorporation? What is this, 1870 or something? You know what downtown Norcross was in 1871? It is the Forum of today. The difference is Norcross circa 1870 is what you have been conditioned to think of as a downtown. Who cares if there is a downtown. This is about maintaining quality of life and property value. However, if you want a downtown then develop the land across from the Forum into something resembling Suwanee’s town green and then build a really nice pedistrian bridge across 141 connecting it with the Forum and call it downtown. That would be way nicer than most downtowns in Georgia.
6. What has the UPCCA done for me not to trust them as compared to our current BOC? Talk about wasteful spending and this is with Republicans running things. You like spending your money on a new ball park? You like all the out of control development the BOC has allowed over the last 20 years. The UPCCA has primarily fought to keep development under control. If you trust Bannister and company go for it.
7. For the third time on the apartments read my earlier comments about private markets doing the demolishing for us. Prior to the recession there were apartments being taken down left and right all the metro area. Bulldozers and private markets are amazing things. If the political leadership does the right things to make an area attractive the “invisible hand” that Adam Smith spoke of back in 1776 will take care of the rest.
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:37 am
Solution found: Just let the City of Norcross annex all the apartments on Peachtree Corners Circle. Subsequently, have the City of Peachtree Corners make its schools MUNICIPAL entities similar to the City of Buford schools. For added taxes, you can assure your property values will remain stable if believe keeping out apartment dwellers of low income will do this for you. All the kids of the residents of apartments will be sent to Stripling and Norcross Elementary. Heck, why not even turn Norcross High School into Peachtree Corners High School and send all the apartment kids to Meadowcreek High?
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:42 am
awright keeps saying that apartments will cause decline. But this makes no sense. No developer is going to come in and find it economically viable to build “slum” property. In all likelihood, any new apartments built will be upscale with quality amenities. This will carry a higher price and attract people with sufficient income to spend on higher end housing. This is hardly the recipe for slums. And there is still that property rights issue - if the landowner can meet a market demand by building apartments such as these, why should the government be able to stop them? We need LESS government control over our lives, not more!
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:59 am
1) Please, please, please someone show me some info that indicates high concentrations of apartments have positive attributes such as low crime, good test scores, less violence in schools, etc. I have lived through apartments causing decline. I see it everyday in areas that used to be nice. I have studied the subject at length. It is a fact. Hell, just drive across I-85 on Indian Trial or Beaver Ruin. Those areas are inundated with apartments. Look at the commerical areas around there. Look at the sidewalks. Look how the property is kept up. That is not decline? Do the same down on Memorial Drive in DeKalb. Do you the same on Buford Hwy in DeKalb. Do the same off of PIB down near 285. Decline, decline, decline. Show me the opposite has happened.
2) Once an area starts to decline there is a limited amount that can be done to arrest that decline. There are areas all over DeKalb and Gwinnett just in my short lifetime that I have seen go from really nice to slums in literally a matter of years. Once the perception is that an area is in decline people and companies avoid it.
3) Upscale apartments…… sure, they might be upscale now but give it time. I used to live in a REALLY nice apartment complex as a child in South DeKalb called Farrington. It was massive. It had golf courses and pools. It was beautiful. Now its a dump. With some very rare exceptions apartments go down in value just like starter homes. Because the “quality” apartments of today will just be run of the mill down at the heal apartments in 20 years and there will be something newer and nicer. Anyone who bets the financial/economic future of their area on “quality” apartments is a fooling themselves. History and data does not support it.
4. Once an area has truly entered the death spiral it would not be uncommon for a developer to come in and buy up either an old shopping center or some run down starter homes and tear them down and build a “new” apartment complex. It happens all the time. Travel around the metro area and see.
5. If you want Property Rights to reign totally supreme than move to Alaska where zoning is practically non existent. Then you can have your three bedroom house next to a gas station, a strip joint and a massage parlor. The balance between Property Rights and Common Good is a difficult balance at best. I don’t want people telling me what to do at all. Believe me. However, I also recognize that there are very powerful market forces and very powerful people that I cannot control or influence and that is where the power of government can be a benefit. Study the US economic history from around 1850 to 1900 and you will see how unregulated capitalism ran roughshod over the little people which at the time would have been you and me. We do not want that.
February 22nd, 2010 at 11:14 am
So because apartment may wind up rundown in 20 years, we should not build them and meet market demand today? There are subdivision of homes that were once nice that are rundown now and there are not necessarily apartments right next door. Where do you propose some folks who cannot afford a single family home live? NIMBY? Well people all over can be NIMBY. That is where property rights come into play. Yes, you have a right to your property and your property value, but you should have to cite a direct causation of harm to you, not some high level conceptual form of harm that you are pushing. Correlation does not imply causality. How do we know that apartments are CAUSING an area’s decline? What are the other factors? Is this enough to deny someone their property rights in absence of causation proof? What if it were YOUR property rights that someone were trying to abridge?
February 22nd, 2010 at 11:19 am
How about making the BOC an open, transparent gov’t filled with responsible competent leaders who put people first? Indeed “responsible leaders” is an oxymoron these days, but heck, let’s try for that before we jump off the dock to create “city lite.” Let’s fire Bannister and his cronies who answer to their gambling/fishing buddies. In District 2, let’s elect someone who isn’t connected to No-Good-Nasuti who wasted taxpayer dollars to create a multi-million dollar boondoggle known as Coolray Field. Sorry, but Jose and Lynette are Bert’s puppets — let’s not go down that road. The Democrat in the race is a ventriloquist’s dummy who is controlled by the loser Gwinnett Dem party and even those connected with Bert. We need new blood on the BOC.
February 22nd, 2010 at 12:04 pm
How do we know apartments are CAUSING an area’s decline? Are you serious? Are they 100% the reason? No. But they are a major reason.
Tell me if you disagree with the following?
- People who live in apartments tend to not emphasize education as much as people who live in houses
- People who don’t emphasize education tend to commit more crimes than people who do?
- Areas that have high crime tend to have to be in areas where lots of criminals live
- Students from families who do not emphasize education tend to do worse in school
- Students who do worse in school tend to drop out
- Students who drop out of school are highly likely to engage in socially destructive behavior
- Areas that have increases in crime tend to have a decrease in property values
This is all A + B = C logic. Fancy legal words and theories cannot refute basic facts.
February 22nd, 2010 at 12:24 pm
People living in apartments do not emphasize education as much as people in houses. Wow. And what data do you have to back that up? I suppose when I lived in an apartment right after I got out of college, I did not care about education. Also, I am sure there are no engineers who work in Technology Park who live in any of the apartments in that area.
That may be A+B=C logic, but when you start from a point that is not clear as to its validity as a primary causation, that logic is not worth a whole lot. In SOME apartment complexes, there may be people of certain socioeconomic categories that do not emphasize education. However, you have to control for a lot of factors to determine the other characteristics of the population of an apartment dwelling before you can jump to such a broadly generalized statement.
February 22nd, 2010 at 12:27 pm
awright, you also failed to address where do people live who cannot afford a single family home? What about the market demand for housing? There are NIMBYs everywhere, so where exactly will business people be able to build apartments to meet a very legitimate market demand for “non-ownership” housing?
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Well if one listens to awright, one would think that decline comes only with apartment dwellers.
Granted living in an apartments does not provide the same vested interest as living in your own home. Granted living in apartments just may be an incentive for the apartment dwellers to want to live in their own homes, but because of varied situations are not there yet. However because one lives in an apartment does NOT mean that they do NOT care about where they live.
This also implies that all homeowners in PC keep their property up, grass cut, painting done, etc…..you want to bet
BTW subdivisions who have foreclosure and short sales homes have had a far greater negative impact on the value of their property and surrounding properties than anything else.
BTW does anybody on this blog think that the value of the homes in the purposed PC city lite have not already been adversely by the RECESSION.
The attitude portrayed by awright is one of the 50’s and 60’s and in the state of GA, we know what that means.
If one is really concerned about the value of property, then let’s put tough standards into effect for commercial property as well as for rental properties. If there were not tough standards and public push, then the FORUM which is so loved today would not look like or be what it is today.
Who owns the properties that rent out to just anyone. PC has always had apartments all along PC Circle and those apartments did NOT become an issue until……those people moved in….give me a break. The apartment OWNERS do NOT care about anything other than “Green”.
PC city lite is NOT the solution, it is a way to keep this place without those…who don’t look like some of the writers on this blog.
Gwinnett as a county is not 30,35, 40 but 45% or more minority, just look at the Norcross HS. So where are you going to run to?
Does PC think that even if it becomes a city lite, that property values will go up and crime will not come in, get your head out of the sand.
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:36 pm
[...] Recent Comments mightylou commented on Does Peachtree Corners really need to be a city? [...]
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:46 pm
awright claims to be the rational one in this discussion who is presenting the facts. Where are his/her sources? It sounds like awright is concocting his/her studies. @awright, please cite your sources. Indeed we have all seen white flight for years. The reason is because folks move away from those who might look a bit different. Thus, they sell quickly — leading to less confidence in the area which leads to very little to no investment in upkeep. Folks like me and others here can read between the lines and see your latent racism very clearly. But, rest assured, you’re not alone in your ignorance. I’m so sorry to label your opinion, but we must call it like we see it.
@awright — You are a hard-working person who wants to protect his/her investment. No one wants to lose on their investment, but it is quite evident that city lite will not protect us from devaluation — a 2007 study at the University of Poughkeepsie say this in black and white.
February 22nd, 2010 at 4:23 pm
I have friends in the Poughkeepsie, NY area, and they fear devaluation of their property due to the numerous foreclosures in the area which of course is tied to the economic downturn.
February 23rd, 2010 at 10:45 am
[...] Colleen Shea commented on Does Peachtree Corners really need to be a city? [...]