What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Braves leaving Turner Field (1 Viewer)

Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Atlanta has never been a tight centralized community - it's not a city where you could live without ever needing a car and never has been. You couldn't just walk to Turner field now either - it's a couple of miles south of anything worth seeing with huge roads in the way. You certainly couldn't go visit the Aquarium and the World of Coke and then walk on over to Turner field. You can do that with Phillips arena and the Dome but Turner field isn't right there.

Anyone thinking Atlanta was going to be this centralized bohemian sprawl hasn't been paying attention or has their head in the sand. Most of the people that come to Atlanta are for jobs (which is why we get a bad reputation as a sports town - most people aren't from here).

 
There are a lot of things at play here. I don't care about the Braves moving to NW Atlanta (aka Cobb). Turner Field is great, but the gameday experience is terrible. You go to the game and you leave the game immediately after-- no hanging around at a bar, or grabbing something to eat. The new place sounds pretty cool, hopefully the plans are executed well.

So there's that.

Then there's the mass-transit thing. I'm a big proponent of it, and I've always resented Cobb and Gwinnett counties for voting down proposal after proposal. So it's kinda hilarious that Cobb is getting a nice stadium that will draw tons of people without any mass transit available to support the increase in traffic. If people ##### and moan about traffic at that spot, you can only blame yourselves.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Yeah, I'm not aware of any outrage over the move per se. More surprise that such a young ballpark is going to be leveled, and it just once again exposes the city's incompetence that they couldn't make it work for the Braves. Probably poor timing with the Falcons deal happening at the same time as well, but the city has had plenty of time to do something with that neighborhood.

I know there will be a lot of questions about where the $450 million is coming from, and if it's from sales or property tax hikes, then you'll see outrage.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Atlanta has never been a tight centralized community - it's not a city where you could live without ever needing a car and never has been. You couldn't just walk to Turner field now either - it's a couple of miles south of anything worth seeing with huge roads in the way. You certainly couldn't go visit the Aquarium and the World of Coke and then walk on over to Turner field. You can do that with Phillips arena and the Dome but Turner field isn't right there.

Anyone thinking Atlanta was going to be this centralized bohemian sprawl hasn't been paying attention or has their head in the sand. Most of the people that come to Atlanta are for jobs (which is why we get a bad reputation as a sports town - most people aren't from here).
Sure, but it can certainly move in one direction or the other over time just like any other city. The guy wanted a revitalized downtown along the lines of Pittsburgh or something, and he's lamenting that the opposite seems to have happened, as embodied by this move. I don't see what's wrong with saying that.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Atlanta has never been a tight centralized community - it's not a city where you could live without ever needing a car and never has been. You couldn't just walk to Turner field now either - it's a couple of miles south of anything worth seeing with huge roads in the way. You certainly couldn't go visit the Aquarium and the World of Coke and then walk on over to Turner field. You can do that with Phillips arena and the Dome but Turner field isn't right there.

Anyone thinking Atlanta was going to be this centralized bohemian sprawl hasn't been paying attention or has their head in the sand. Most of the people that come to Atlanta are for jobs (which is why we get a bad reputation as a sports town - most people aren't from here).
Sure, but it can certainly move in one direction or the other over time just like any other city. The guy wanted a revitalized downtown along the lines of Pittsburgh or something, and he's lamenting that the opposite seems to have happened, as embodied by this move. I don't see what's wrong with saying that.
There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it's unrealistic. Atlanta doesn't have any geographical borders preventing sprawl. No rivers, mountains, lakes, whatever.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Atlanta has never been a tight centralized community - it's not a city where you could live without ever needing a car and never has been. You couldn't just walk to Turner field now either - it's a couple of miles south of anything worth seeing with huge roads in the way. You certainly couldn't go visit the Aquarium and the World of Coke and then walk on over to Turner field. You can do that with Phillips arena and the Dome but Turner field isn't right there.Anyone thinking Atlanta was going to be this centralized bohemian sprawl hasn't been paying attention or has their head in the sand. Most of the people that come to Atlanta are for jobs (which is why we get a bad reputation as a sports town - most people aren't from here).
Sure, but it can certainly move in one direction or the other over time just like any other city. The guy wanted a revitalized downtown along the lines of Pittsburgh or something, and he's lamenting that the opposite seems to have happened, as embodied by this move. I don't see what's wrong with saying that.
There's nothing wrong with saying it, but it was never going to happen. The city nearly lost the falcons to the suburbs as well because they wanted all this extra money for the sketchy neighborhoods in surrounding areas. They always play games instead of actually revitalizing anything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are a lot of things at play here. I don't care about the Braves moving to NW Atlanta (aka Cobb). Turner Field is great, but the gameday experience is terrible. You go to the game and you leave the game immediately after-- no hanging around at a bar, or grabbing something to eat. The new place sounds pretty cool, hopefully the plans are executed well.

So there's that.

Then there's the mass-transit thing. I'm a big proponent of it, and I've always resented Cobb and Gwinnett counties for voting down proposal after proposal. So it's kinda hilarious that Cobb is getting a nice stadium that will draw tons of people without any mass transit available to support the increase in traffic. If people ##### and moan about traffic at that spot, you can only blame yourselves.
I never would have voted against Marta expanding up here. Imagine if they had a line with stops at Cumberland Mall, Windy Hill, Marietta Square and Town Center Mall. That would greatly alleviate traffic 7 days a week. You'd see more people heading into the city on weekends too, which would stimulate business there. I can't think of another big city with such a lacking subway system. Go to NYC, or DC, Philly, Baltimore, you can get to and from the city center into most of the suburbs via train.

 
There are a lot of things at play here. I don't care about the Braves moving to NW Atlanta (aka Cobb). Turner Field is great, but the gameday experience is terrible. You go to the game and you leave the game immediately after-- no hanging around at a bar, or grabbing something to eat. The new place sounds pretty cool, hopefully the plans are executed well.

So there's that.

Then there's the mass-transit thing. I'm a big proponent of it, and I've always resented Cobb and Gwinnett counties for voting down proposal after proposal. So it's kinda hilarious that Cobb is getting a nice stadium that will draw tons of people without any mass transit available to support the increase in traffic. If people ##### and moan about traffic at that spot, you can only blame yourselves.
I never would have voted against Marta expanding up here. Imagine if they had a line with stops at Cumberland Mall, Windy Hill, Marietta Square and Town Center Mall. That would greatly alleviate traffic 7 days a week. You'd see more people heading into the city on weekends too, which would stimulate business there. I can't think of another big city with such a lacking subway system. Go to NYC, or DC, Philly, Baltimore, you can get to and from the city center into most of the suburbs via train.
I agree, but you have to realize Atlanta was founded in the 1830's. It's not even 200 years old yet. Those northern metropolises (Boston, NYC, Philly) are 300-400 years old. They also have natural borders (mostly water) to prevent suburban sprawl in at least one direction. Those factors add up to a much higher population density than Atlanta could ever have.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Yeah, I'm not aware of any outrage over the move per se. More surprise that such a young ballpark is going to be leveled, and it just once again exposes the city's incompetence that they couldn't make it work for the Braves. Probably poor timing with the Falcons deal happening at the same time as well, but the city has had plenty of time to do something with that neighborhood.

I know there will be a lot of questions about where the $450 million is coming from, and if it's from sales or property tax hikes, then you'll see outrage.
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. Sure, some American cities can't really expand in all four directions like San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions- but those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers. And some of the ones that do have geographic restrictions in one direction (LA, Houston) still have a ton of sprawl and are a bit lacking in walkable downtowns.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.
Who's paying for the road work/utility upgrades around there - that is what they will need without a doubt.

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.
Who's paying for the road work/utility upgrades around there - that is what they will need without a doubt.
If it's directly related to the stadium, I assume some of that is included in the $450 million number. Currently, we pay a 1 cent sales tax for road and infrastructure improvements which has funded many projects.

Also, a major league baseball team will provide significant additional tax revenue and bring a lot of money into the local economy. That seems to rarely get mentioned, but that needs to be considered in any discussion of cost.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
That is a huge part of it, but it's an economic choice more often than not. There are a handful of decent walkable neighborhoods ITP that are very desirable for the single white professional. But once they get married and have kids, they look for good schools and a safe neighborhood. If you want that without leaving the city, you're paying a lot more than you would in Cobb for a detached house with a yard, and then you probably have to send your kids to private school.

One thing you see in northern cities that you don't see here is miles and miles of high density housing -- highrises, row homes, duplexes on top of each other. That has never been the character of this city. It's always been the plantation house with the big wraparound porch. Look at all the detached homes in Buckhead, Morningside, Midtown, etc. Other cities would house 10 times the population that those areas do, and prices are outrageous. If you want something more affordable, you can get a condo in Midtown, but no one wants to raise kids there. People want the cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac, and they're willing to endure horrific commutes for more square footage and better schools.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
That is a huge part of it, but it's an economic choice more often than not. There are a handful of decent walkable neighborhoods ITP that are very desirable for the single white professional. But once they get married and have kids, they look for good schools and a safe neighborhood. If you want that without leaving the city, you're paying a lot more than you would in Cobb for a detached house with a yard, and then you probably have to send your kids to private school.

One thing you see in northern cities that you don't see here is miles and miles of high density housing -- highrises, row homes, duplexes on top of each other. That has never been the character of this city. It's always been the plantation house with the big wraparound porch. Look at all the detached homes in Buckhead, Morningside, Midtown, etc. Other cities would house 10 times the population that those areas do, and prices are outrageous. If you want something more affordable, you can get a condo in Midtown, but no one wants to raise kids there. People want the cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac, and they're willing to endure horrific commutes for more square footage and better schools.
This is an interesting point I hadn't thought about. Obviously available housing is mostly a response the market, but it's also true that the northern cities had the rowhouses and duplexes and big old apartments and condo buildings and whatnot ready to go when people started moving back to the cities over the last 10-20 years, and places like Atlanta and Dallas and Houston and whatnot don't really have that to my knowledge.

 
Rembert's anger is misguided. The Braves are "leaving" Atlanta because the city has done nothing to improve the stadium or surrounding areas.
Exactly. They dragged their feet for years.I don't get all the hyperbole about "the team is leaving Atlanta!!!" It's ten miles.
Isn't it ridiculous? That area is 10 minutes from my home in Virginia Highlands (no traffic). There's a Carrabba's up there that we frequent. My buddy had an apartment there while he was at GT.

Can't believe so many people are freaking out over the move. It's not like they're going to Peachtree City or Rome.
Seriously - I'm in Suwanee so it's marginally closer for me but I just don't get the outrage. The city has been spreading and expanding for years.
I don't live there so I can't say for sure, but from reading the column and my twitter feed it sounds like this is the source of the "outrage." A lot of people consider this to be a negative thing, and I guess this move is the most extreme and obvious symbol of it. It's easier to protest a single move than the slow creep of sprawl.
Atlanta has never been a tight centralized community - it's not a city where you could live without ever needing a car and never has been. You couldn't just walk to Turner field now either - it's a couple of miles south of anything worth seeing with huge roads in the way. You certainly couldn't go visit the Aquarium and the World of Coke and then walk on over to Turner field. You can do that with Phillips arena and the Dome but Turner field isn't right there.

Anyone thinking Atlanta was going to be this centralized bohemian sprawl hasn't been paying attention or has their head in the sand. Most of the people that come to Atlanta are for jobs (which is why we get a bad reputation as a sports town - most people aren't from here).
I lived in central Atlanta (midtown) for 4 years without a car. You suburbanites are soft.

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.
Who's paying for the road work/utility upgrades around there - that is what they will need without a doubt.
Yep. Logically, it would seem that the roads south of Windy Hill need to be widened and/or reconfigured to allow better access to the site, otherwise it's going to be gridlock. Windy Hill is going to be the exit of choice for people traveling south on 75 going to a game, so that ramp needs to be widened and new roads added to handle the volume. The $450 million from the county doesn't address that at all.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.
Mostly single professionals though. Atlanta has had a steady twentysomething influx since I moved here in '93, and city living is very desirable when you live by yourself or with a roommate, work in town, and go out with your friends a lot. There are exceptions of course, but more often than not these people migrate to the burbs once they get hitched and start ####ting out rugrats.

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.
Who's paying for the road work/utility upgrades around there - that is what they will need without a doubt.
Yep. Logically, it would seem that the roads south of Windy Hill need to be widened and/or reconfigured to allow better access to the site, otherwise it's going to be gridlock. Windy Hill is going to be the exit of choice for people traveling south on 75 going to a game, so that ramp needs to be widened and new roads added to handle the volume. The $450 million from the county doesn't address that at all.
There is actually widening scheduled for Windy Hill using funds from the SPLOST sales tax I mentioned. They could also use Tax allocaton districts for improvements that would be repaid by future increases in tax revenue. Using a TAD was very successful in the redevelopment of Atlantic Station without raising taxes.

I've also heard a rumor that they could use the cloverleaf as access to alleviate traffic.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.
I hate it too, but to be fair, football is kind of a different animal. Many cities don't have space for parking for 90,000 around a football stadium, plus 8 regular season games and 2 preseason games a year can't really do much for the economy of the surrounding area like 81 baseball games or 82 combined hockey/basketball games plus pre/postseason. Other than Charlotte and New Orleans, do any NFL teams play in the middle of a downtown area?

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.
I hate it too, but to be fair, football is kind of a different animal. Many cities don't have space for parking for 90,000 around a football stadium, plus 8 regular season games and 2 preseason games a year can't really do much for the economy of the surrounding area like 81 baseball games or 82 combined hockey/basketball games plus pre/postseason. Other than Charlotte and New Orleans, do any NFL teams play in the middle of a downtown area?
Mile High is pretty walkable from Downtown unless the weather is really bad. It's two stops on light rail if you want to get closer. Not quite the "middle" though.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.
I hate it too, but to be fair, football is kind of a different animal. Many cities don't have space for parking for 90,000 around a football stadium, plus 8 regular season games and 2 preseason games a year can't really do much for the economy of the surrounding area like 81 baseball games or 82 combined hockey/basketball games plus pre/postseason. Other than Charlotte and New Orleans, do any NFL teams play in the middle of a downtown area?
Is the Georgia Dome considered downtown to you? What about Baltimore? It's a short walk to Inner Harbor but technically I guess not downtown Baltimore. In Pittsburgh, PNC Park is walk across the river to downtown but Heinz Field would be a long walk.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.
I hate it too, but to be fair, football is kind of a different animal. Many cities don't have space for parking for 90,000 around a football stadium, plus 8 regular season games and 2 preseason games a year can't really do much for the economy of the surrounding area like 81 baseball games or 82 combined hockey/basketball games plus pre/postseason. Other than Charlotte and New Orleans, do any NFL teams play in the middle of a downtown area?
Yeah, I get that. I was actually at FedEx for a soccer game in late July so it was pretty brutal walk to get to the upper-deck.

I know Atlanta is downtown and Chicago is pretty close by. Jacksonville is downtown, but there isn't much downtwon there. Those are the only ones in the city that I've been to.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
Actually my understanding is that in Atlanta whites have been moving in.

Some traditionally black districts have had some demographic changes.

Personally I'm a big fan of downtown stadiums, cities miss out on the sports industry possibilities a lot. I think the reason is that politicians who make decisions on this sell out to people with property interests - wherever that property is - but typically it's people who bought huge tracts of land real cheap (ie outside the city) and then fleece the public on the inside sale. Rather than develop the downtown and generate the economy the pals of pols keep most of the dough. This is both R & D by the way, the money don't care.
:goodposting:

I agree with this. I really like how Charlotte has the Panthers, Bobcats, and AAA team (starting this Spring) all within a few blocks of each other.

Can't stand situations like Fedex Field in DC where you follow up a long train ride with a healthy walk and have to wait to get on the train for an hour afterwards.

I like visiting Atlanta, but am always overwhelmed by how spread out and difficult to navigate things are. Midtown seems like it would be cool though.
I hate it too, but to be fair, football is kind of a different animal. Many cities don't have space for parking for 90,000 around a football stadium, plus 8 regular season games and 2 preseason games a year can't really do much for the economy of the surrounding area like 81 baseball games or 82 combined hockey/basketball games plus pre/postseason. Other than Charlotte and New Orleans, do any NFL teams play in the middle of a downtown area?
Is the Georgia Dome considered downtown to you? What about Baltimore? It's a short walk to Inner Harbor but technically I guess not downtown Baltimore. In Pittsburgh, PNC Park is walk across the river to downtown but Heinz Field would be a long walk.
Of yeah, Baltimore. Chicago too. So there's some. Hard to do, though.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
That is a huge part of it, but it's an economic choice more often than not. There are a handful of decent walkable neighborhoods ITP that are very desirable for the single white professional. But once they get married and have kids, they look for good schools and a safe neighborhood. If you want that without leaving the city, you're paying a lot more than you would in Cobb for a detached house with a yard, and then you probably have to send your kids to private school.

One thing you see in northern cities that you don't see here is miles and miles of high density housing -- highrises, row homes, duplexes on top of each other. That has never been the character of this city. It's always been the plantation house with the big wraparound porch. Look at all the detached homes in Buckhead, Morningside, Midtown, etc. Other cities would house 10 times the population that those areas do, and prices are outrageous. If you want something more affordable, you can get a condo in Midtown, but no one wants to raise kids there. People want the cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac, and they're willing to endure horrific commutes for more square footage and better schools.
Good post but for those of us who live in the Atlanta burbs (I'm in Johns Creek), it's less about "cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac" (guilty as charged) and more about schools. In fact, I'd rather live in a more unique house but it's pretty much all they build out in North Fulton. Believe me, if the schools ITP weren't warzones, I'd gladly move into the city.

 
I don't understand this geography causing/preventing sprawl argument. It's not the 19th century. We can and do cross rivers in cars and trains pretty easily. The only American cities that can't really expand in all four directions are San Francisco, Chicago and Boston- and they can still expand in three directions. Those places and others that can expand in four directions (NY, Philly, DC) still maintain vibrant urban centers.

Isn't it much more likely that sprawl, or the lack of it, is by choice? In cities that have great downtowns many people are living there by choice, not necessity. They want to be in the thick of it all, and are willing to share their space with others to get that vibe. For better or worse, Atlantans mostly seem to think differently. Geography doesn't explain why the suburbs cut themselves off from downtown by rejecting mass transit. That's fine.
Its called white flight.
That is a huge part of it, but it's an economic choice more often than not. There are a handful of decent walkable neighborhoods ITP that are very desirable for the single white professional. But once they get married and have kids, they look for good schools and a safe neighborhood. If you want that without leaving the city, you're paying a lot more than you would in Cobb for a detached house with a yard, and then you probably have to send your kids to private school.

One thing you see in northern cities that you don't see here is miles and miles of high density housing -- highrises, row homes, duplexes on top of each other. That has never been the character of this city. It's always been the plantation house with the big wraparound porch. Look at all the detached homes in Buckhead, Morningside, Midtown, etc. Other cities would house 10 times the population that those areas do, and prices are outrageous. If you want something more affordable, you can get a condo in Midtown, but no one wants to raise kids there. People want the cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac, and they're willing to endure horrific commutes for more square footage and better schools.
Good post but for those of us who live in the Atlanta burbs (I'm in Johns Creek), it's less about "cookie cutter McMansion on a cul-de-sac" (guilty as charged) and more about schools. In fact, I'd rather live in a more unique house but it's pretty much all they build out in North Fulton. Believe me, if the schools ITP weren't warzones, I'd gladly move into the city.
We were lucky enough to stumble upon a renovated 1968 brick ranch house on an acre in west Cobb. Everything else in our range were the typical vanilla subdivision homes on top of each other. I know it's extremely difficult to find anything with character around here, believe me.

There are some really cool fixer-uppers in midtown for like 300-400K, houses built around the 50's that are often torn down and replaced with 3 story behemoths and resold for over a million. My dream would be to buy one of them and fix it up. You've got an actual house with a yard that has some character and you're like a block from the High museum.

 
Here is a quote from Joe Dendy, Chairman for Cobb County Republican Party, explaining his conditions for supporting the Braves' proposed move, which provides some insight into the mentality of many Atlanta suburbanites:

"It is absolutely necessary the (transportation) solution is all about moving cars in and around Cobb and surrounding counties from our north and east where most Braves fans travel from, and not moving people into Cobb by rail from Atlanta."

So it appears as if there is a good chance that the new Braves stadium will never get decent public transportation access because Cobb County conservatives will never allow MARTA to expand and allow "those people from downtown Atlanta without cars" to get to the stadium via public transportation.

http://m.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/

 
I live in Cobb and I'll also be interested to see the details of the financing. This article suggests that a hotel tax (which is what Atlanta used with the Falcons stadium) could be used to fund most of the project, which I would be fine with. The Galleria Centre nearby already brings a lot of visitors to hotels for conventions, and the stadium will also obviously bring more people to the area's hotels.

This whole thing really is just shocking to me, though. I'm an Atlanta native, lifelong Braves fan, and now they're moving to within 3 miles of where I live. Can't help but be very excited about it, but I figured that many wouldn't like the move for a variety of reasons.
In 2010, the hotel tax generated in excess of $9 million. That figure is based on a report in the Marietta Daily Journal that an 8 percent payment from the authority to the Cobb County Convention & Visitors Bureau would amount to $8.9 million.
I doubt that will even pay the interest
I assume that they mean that the authority will increase the hotel tax rate, and that the stadium will attract a much larger number of hotel visitors. The article also says that they would have until 2050 to repay it.

But like I said, I'll be interested to see the financing details, because I do pay property taxes to the county, so I have a stake in this.
Who's paying for the road work/utility upgrades around there - that is what they will need without a doubt.
If it's directly related to the stadium, I assume some of that is included in the $450 million number. Currently, we pay a 1 cent sales tax for road and infrastructure improvements which has funded many projects.

Also, a major league baseball team will provide significant additional tax revenue and bring a lot of money into the local economy. That seems to rarely get mentioned, but that needs to be considered in any discussion of cost.
First of all, it gets mentioned all the time during the pitch. But the problem is, it's a load of ####.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/if-you-build-it-they-might-not-come-the-risky-economics-of-sports-stadiums/260900/

Time after time, politicians wary of letting a local franchise relocate -- as the NBA's Seattle Supersonics did, to Oklahoma City before the 2008-2009 season -- approve public funds, selling the stadiums as public works projects that will boost the local economy and provide a windfall of growth.

However, according to leading sports economists, stadiums and arenas rarely bring about the promised prosperity, and instead leave cities and states mired in debt that they can't pay back before the franchise comes calling for more.

"The basic idea is that sports stadiums typically aren't a good tool for economic development," said Victor Matheson, an economist at Holy Cross who has studied the economic impact of stadium construction for decades. When cities cite studies (often produced by parties with an interest in building the stadium) touting the impact of such projects, there is a simple rule for determining the actual return on investment, Matheson said: "Take whatever number the sports promoter says, take it and move the decimal one place to the left. Divide it by ten, and that's a pretty good estimate of the actual economic impact."

Others agree. While "it is inarguable that within a few blocks you'll have an effect," the results are questionable for metro areas as a whole, Stefan Szymanski, a sports economist at the University of Michigan, said.

PUBLIC MONEY BALL

There are numerous reasons for the muted economic effects. The biggest is that arenas often sit empty for a significant portion of the year. Jobing.com Arena is guaranteed 41 hockey games annually. The other 324 nights, it must find concerts, conventions or other events to fill the schedule, and in Glendale, where the arena competes with facilities in nearby Phoenix, that can be tough to do.

"We've looked at tons of these things, and the one that we found that seemed to make sense is the Staples Center in Los Angeles," Matheson said. "But they use it 250 dates a year. They don't make sense when you're using it 41 times a year and competing with another venue down the street."

Another reason the projects rarely make sense is because of the way they are structured. Stadiums and arenas are financed with long-term bonds, meaning cities and states will be stuck with the debt for long periods of time (often 30 years). And while cities make 30-year commitments to finance stadiums, their commitments to government workers and other local investments are often made on a year-to-year basis, meaning that, just as in Glendale, it becomes easier to eliminate public sector jobs and programs than to default on debt incurred from arenas.
 
Here is a quote from Joe Dendy, Chairman for Cobb County Republican Party, explaining his conditions for supporting the Braves' proposed move, which provides some insight into the mentality of many Atlanta suburbanites:

"It is absolutely necessary the (transportation) solution is all about moving cars in and around Cobb and surrounding counties from our north and east where most Braves fans travel from, and not moving people into Cobb by rail from Atlanta."

So it appears as if there is a good chance that the new Braves stadium will never get decent public transportation access because Cobb County conservatives will never allow MARTA to expand and allow "those people from downtown Atlanta without cars" to get to the stadium via public transportation.

http://m.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/
He can say whatever he wants, he's not an elected official.

Anyway, the Braves had plans to fund a private maglev train from Marta to Turner Field. The company was based in Cobb County. I wonder if that is still on the table.

 
First of all, it gets mentioned all the time during the pitch. But the problem is, it's a load of ####.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/if-you-build-it-they-might-not-come-the-risky-economics-of-sports-stadiums/260900/

Time after time, politicians wary of letting a local franchise relocate -- as the NBA's Seattle Supersonics did, to Oklahoma City before the 2008-2009 season -- approve public funds, selling the stadiums as public works projects that will boost the local economy and provide a windfall of growth.

However, according to leading sports economists, stadiums and arenas rarely bring about the promised prosperity, and instead leave cities and states mired in debt that they can't pay back before the franchise comes calling for more.

"The basic idea is that sports stadiums typically aren't a good tool for economic development," said Victor Matheson, an economist at Holy Cross who has studied the economic impact of stadium construction for decades. When cities cite studies (often produced by parties with an interest in building the stadium) touting the impact of such projects, there is a simple rule for determining the actual return on investment, Matheson said: "Take whatever number the sports promoter says, take it and move the decimal one place to the left. Divide it by ten, and that's a pretty good estimate of the actual economic impact."

Others agree. While "it is inarguable that within a few blocks you'll have an effect," the results are questionable for metro areas as a whole, Stefan Szymanski, a sports economist at the University of Michigan, said.

PUBLIC MONEY BALL

There are numerous reasons for the muted economic effects. The biggest is that arenas often sit empty for a significant portion of the year. Jobing.com Arena is guaranteed 41 hockey games annually. The other 324 nights, it must find concerts, conventions or other events to fill the schedule, and in Glendale, where the arena competes with facilities in nearby Phoenix, that can be tough to do.

"We've looked at tons of these things, and the one that we found that seemed to make sense is the Staples Center in Los Angeles," Matheson said. "But they use it 250 dates a year. They don't make sense when you're using it 41 times a year and competing with another venue down the street."

Another reason the projects rarely make sense is because of the way they are structured. Stadiums and arenas are financed with long-term bonds, meaning cities and states will be stuck with the debt for long periods of time (often 30 years). And while cities make 30-year commitments to finance stadiums, their commitments to government workers and other local investments are often made on a year-to-year basis, meaning that, just as in Glendale, it becomes easier to eliminate public sector jobs and programs than to default on debt incurred from arenas.
No, they definitely bring in added tax revenue and money to the local economy. The article admits as much, in the bolded. The question this article and others take on is whether they are worth the investment if they're publicly funded, not whether there's anything on the plus side of the ledger.

 
No, they definitely bring in added tax revenue and money to the local economy. The article admits as much, in the bolded. The question this article and others take on is whether they are worth the investment if they're publicly funded, not whether there's anything on the plus side of the ledger.
Sorry, I assumed Dippa was taking the same approach of every other politician and developer who has ever commented on the "benefits" to an economy when discussing a new stadium using public money. They intend to mislead.

 
Here is a quote from Joe Dendy, Chairman for Cobb County Republican Party, explaining his conditions for supporting the Braves' proposed move, which provides some insight into the mentality of many Atlanta suburbanites:

"It is absolutely necessary the (transportation) solution is all about moving cars in and around Cobb and surrounding counties from our north and east where most Braves fans travel from, and not moving people into Cobb by rail from Atlanta."

So it appears as if there is a good chance that the new Braves stadium will never get decent public transportation access because Cobb County conservatives will never allow MARTA to expand and allow "those people from downtown Atlanta without cars" to get to the stadium via public transportation.

http://m.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/
He can say whatever he wants, he's not an elected official.

Anyway, the Braves had plans to fund a private maglev train from Marta to Turner Field. The company was based in Cobb County. I wonder if that is still on the table.
I'm not trying to throw this particular guy under the bus (or privately-owned suburban minivan for that matter). I'm just saying that he is expressing what I believe is a fairly commonly-held sentiment amongst the conservatives who largely make up the Atlanta suburbs. It is the same sentiment that helped defeat the T-SPLOST public transportation funding referendum in July 2012.

 
I have absolutely nothing to add to this discussion, but as someone who moved to Atlanta (midtown) about a month ago, a lot of these posts are really fascinating and informative. Thanks to all for the interesting discussion. :thumbup:

 
This is an interesting article about the Turner Field area. It's was published in May so this week's events dates parts of it but if they haven't been able to get this microeconomy together in 20 years, they're very unlikely to now.

 
No, they definitely bring in added tax revenue and money to the local economy. The article admits as much, in the bolded. The question this article and others take on is whether they are worth the investment if they're publicly funded, not whether there's anything on the plus side of the ledger.
Sorry, I assumed Dippa was taking the same approach of every other politician and developer who has ever commented on the "benefits" to an economy when discussing a new stadium using public money. They intend to mislead.
Uh, why would you make that assumption? I already said that, as a taxpayer in the county, I will be interested to see the financing details, but they haven't been released yet. I may change my opinion when those details emerge. My only real point in that statement was that no one in this thread was mentioning any economic benefits, but simply the cost. Your article was an interesting counter-point.

 
Here is a quote from Joe Dendy, Chairman for Cobb County Republican Party, explaining his conditions for supporting the Braves' proposed move, which provides some insight into the mentality of many Atlanta suburbanites:

"It is absolutely necessary the (transportation) solution is all about moving cars in and around Cobb and surrounding counties from our north and east where most Braves fans travel from, and not moving people into Cobb by rail from Atlanta."

So it appears as if there is a good chance that the new Braves stadium will never get decent public transportation access because Cobb County conservatives will never allow MARTA to expand and allow "those people from downtown Atlanta without cars" to get to the stadium via public transportation.

http://m.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/
He can say whatever he wants, he's not an elected official.

Anyway, the Braves had plans to fund a private maglev train from Marta to Turner Field. The company was based in Cobb County. I wonder if that is still on the table.
I'm not trying to throw this particular guy under the bus (or privately-owned suburban minivan for that matter). I'm just saying that he is expressing what I believe is a fairly commonly-held sentiment amongst the conservatives who largely make up the Atlanta suburbs. It is the same sentiment that helped defeat the T-SPLOST public transportation funding referendum in July 2012.
And Bookman is being Bookman, crying racism where it may or may not exist. Why would they throw money into developing rail from Atlanta for the Braves when the fanbase is already in the northern burbs? I anticipate that they will develop a public transport route from Gwinnett to Cobb for the games, but there is no reason to sink millions into rail to allow for fans that simply don't exist in large enough numbers ITP.

All that aside, as far as the people complaining about Marta not being allowed in Cobb; doesn't CCT have routes that run downtown? There is public transport between the NW suburbs and downtown, it's just not Marta.

 
I have absolutely nothing to add to this discussion, but as someone who moved to Atlanta (midtown) about a month ago, a lot of these posts are really fascinating and informative. Thanks to all for the interesting discussion. :thumbup:
Informative to me as well, and I moved here 20 years ago. The FBGs, they're just a wealth of info and opinions on anything you could name really.

 
No, they definitely bring in added tax revenue and money to the local economy. The article admits as much, in the bolded. The question this article and others take on is whether they are worth the investment if they're publicly funded, not whether there's anything on the plus side of the ledger.
Sorry, I assumed Dippa was taking the same approach of every other politician and developer who has ever commented on the "benefits" to an economy when discussing a new stadium using public money. They intend to mislead.
Uh, why would you make that assumption? I already said that, as a taxpayer in the county, I will be interested to see the financing details, but they haven't been released yet. I may change my opinion when those details emerge. My only real point in that statement was that no one in this thread was mentioning any economic benefits, but simply the cost. Your article was an interesting counter-point.
I always love how these deals are done behind closed doors where the people picking up the bill (taxpayers) aren't present. Was the same thing with Charlotte. Jerry wanted some nicer a[SIZE=10.5pt]menities for the box seat crown and escalators. He met with city council and convinced them to raise restaurant taxes to pay for it. Wooohoo. [/SIZE]

 
Here is a quote from Joe Dendy, Chairman for Cobb County Republican Party, explaining his conditions for supporting the Braves' proposed move, which provides some insight into the mentality of many Atlanta suburbanites:

"It is absolutely necessary the (transportation) solution is all about moving cars in and around Cobb and surrounding counties from our north and east where most Braves fans travel from, and not moving people into Cobb by rail from Atlanta."

So it appears as if there is a good chance that the new Braves stadium will never get decent public transportation access because Cobb County conservatives will never allow MARTA to expand and allow "those people from downtown Atlanta without cars" to get to the stadium via public transportation.

http://m.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/nov/12/cobb-gop-chairman-concerned-about-those-people-com/
He can say whatever he wants, he's not an elected official.

Anyway, the Braves had plans to fund a private maglev train from Marta to Turner Field. The company was based in Cobb County. I wonder if that is still on the table.
I'm not trying to throw this particular guy under the bus (or privately-owned suburban minivan for that matter). I'm just saying that he is expressing what I believe is a fairly commonly-held sentiment amongst the conservatives who largely make up the Atlanta suburbs. It is the same sentiment that helped defeat the T-SPLOST public transportation funding referendum in July 2012.
And Bookman is being Bookman, crying racism where it may or may not exist. Why would they throw money into developing rail from Atlanta for the Braves when the fanbase is already in the northern burbs? I anticipate that they will develop a public transport route from Gwinnett to Cobb for the games, but there is no reason to sink millions into rail to allow for fans that simply don't exist in large enough numbers ITP. All that aside, as far as the people complaining about Marta not being allowed in Cobb; doesn't CCT have routes that run downtown? There is public transport between the NW suburbs and downtown, it's just not Marta.
(1) Because Atlanta traffic in and around Cobb County is already amongst the worst in the nation (2) Because there are plenty of Braves fans inside the perimeter that would opt to take public transportation rather than sit in traffic for an hour on I-75 during rush hour to get to the game

(3) Because visitors to the city of Atlanta will essentially be unable to attend a Braves game without renting a car

(4) Because Cobb County's current CCT system is likely woefully unprepared to handle the increased demand with the new stadium

I still find it insane that one of the reasons that the Braves are justifying leaving Turner Field is an alleged "lack of consistent mass transportation," yet are moving to an area in which no such mass transportation system exists, nor does it appear likely that it will expand to that area in the near future.

I have to admit that I am particularly bitter about this move as someone who grew up in the south Atlanta suburbs, even though I don't currently live there and will never return. The commute to a game from my hometown likely went from about 40 minutes to closer to 1 hour and 45 minutes during rush hour. No other fully red county on the season ticket holder heat map will be impacted worse than the 30269 from a commuting perspective.

http://homeofthebraves.com/wp-content/uploads/heat-map.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All that aside, as far as the people complaining about Marta not being allowed in Cobb; doesn't CCT have routes that run downtown? There is public transport between the NW suburbs and downtown, it's just not Marta.
Yes they do but to be honest that's a blip on the radar when it comes to mass transit. It's crap but despite that most don't belive that MARTA will be beneficial to the area. I don't agree myself but I understand the argument.

And welcome to Atlanta Krista!

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top