Atlanta is just a mish-mesh of separated communities and jurisdictions, filled with citizens with no care or need to care about how their communities are shaping. The boundaries of Atlanta are relatively infinite, compared to many other large cities such as LA, SF, Seattle, NYC, and even Chicago. This large migratory area makes people move around to a fitting location, instead of trying to change things about their current location through community involvement.
Private developers and other investors have a leading role in shaping the landscape of a city. We’re talking about a relatively small amount of people here, in an overall area of 5 million people. These developers though, may live up to 2 hours away from the community they develop, and may not even know anybody in that area. The developer only acts upon data that he has. The methods a developer or investor will use to evaluate a site are all based on statistics and profit forecast. Also, the developer can only invest in areas which they are allowed to. In an ideal community, the community would decide what the allowed land uses would be. The government’s job is ideally to be the voice of the people, enforcing strict development rules of what can go where and how it can be built.
When you have a large migratory area with high immigration, gathering data and forecasting what’s best for the community is difficult.
I believe that city development should be more closely based on the demand of the local community.
I think the following Questions should be asked of every person in a community:
1. Define what you think the boundaries of your community are
2. How long have you lived in your community?
3. How long do you plan on staying?
4. What makes you like your community
5. What makes you unhappy about your community
6. What are some things that you want to see done about your community?
7. What is your situational involvement in your community: live, live & work, work, etc..?
We need to shift the focus away from the investors and a host of governing laws which don’t always have an overall positive effect on a community, and instead focus on an active community involvement in development. Unfortunately though, even if the technology or structure was in place to have this process, I’m not sure it would work for Atlanta because of it’s geography, size, and layout.
A very interesting thing that I’ve noticed about Atlanta that supports my viewpoint is Decatur, GA. Decatur is different from the other cities in the metro area because it is separated from major transportation thoroughfares. It’s on the East side, but away from I-20, so there aren’t a lot of passersby. Decatur benefits because it arguably has the best downtown in the metro Atlanta area. This separatism helps attract quality residents who plan on living there for more than 1 year.
Attracting quality people, not high quantity, should be the goal. Most land developers in Atlanta are looking at overall migration and mainly home construction. Atlanta is becoming known as the place where people who want to live relatively cheaply live, while taking advantage of other communities like a spoiled child. It’s full of people who want suburbia plus the big city convenience. Or, those who move here to work or go to college live temporarily in an apartment. You can be in any location in Atlanta and not know the demographics at that location and most likely 90% of the people you see might live over 30 minutes away.
Unfortunately, the US interstate system has played the largest role in city development than any other factor, with exception to the finer cities that aren’t plagued with a 20 lane highway passing through them.
Technology would help, but the seeds have already been sown in many parts of Atlanta which will result in failed communities.
What a perfect investigative story this is. Is it the government’s fault or the airline’s? Should we add another government agency to protect airline consumers? Another question, is it part government’s fault the airline industry isn’t very profitable?
Great topic of discussion here.
Storytelling is everything. People are wired for stories. If it’s written well, people will be drawn into it, unable to step away and waiting for your next word.
People who tell great stories are usually successful in their personal and professional lives. People who can’t tell stories have a more difficult time drawing people to them.
It’s just one of a million things they don’t teach you how to do in school.
In film, just like in books, there are many ways of telling a story. If the film is using first person narration, then that film will have to spend a lot of money and make sure they do good writing. Many films switch scenes, or chapters, back and forth and that’s OK too. It all depends on the complexity of the plot, and how many people are involved in the storyline.
Even in documentaries. The guy doing all the shooting with the camera is trained in imagery, not storytelling. There has to be an outside force forcing a story into the film. Yes, it may have to be fake, but it’s a requirement. Usually it’s best to just hire someone skilled in story development. It’s the same with reality shows, if there isn’t drama going on then they will make it up, without a story you have nothing.
Even if the content is interesting you still have nothing without a story. Or at least nothing deliverable to an audience.
I’m thinking somebody needs to address the issue of the engineering profession and it’s future and/or future of society because of it.
I think this is an important topic because it’s very helpful and interesting to learn how both young and seasoned people view the profession and the way society is impacted.