Like it or not, Decatur continues to expand up and out.

Two recent developments (pun intended) in city news, the planned “mini-city” in the 315 W. Ponce parking lot and the recently announced proposal to expand the city limits on the north and east side, promise to reinvigorate a debate the city has been having for more than 20 years.

Those who have lived in the city for decades or have followed city history since moving here realize that this is not a new debate. All you need to do is take a look at the Decatur Town Center Plan, which was written in 1982, and read goals 4 and 5…

GOAL 4: CONSERVE DECATUR’S SMALL-TOWN SCALE

Citizens asked for the encouragement of more small shops and opportunities for new merchants . . . for landscape and streetscape treatments that would make downtown Decatur a delightful and safe place for pedestrians night and day.

GOAL 5: NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD REINFORCE THE EXISTING SCALE

The citizens expressed fears that, without guidelines backed by policies that encourage compatible development the small-town scale addressed in Goal 4 could be destroyed.

Today, our city no longer has to exert much effort to convince small businesses to open up in town. The real challenge has become whether we can continue to thrive as a quirky, community-friendly enclave without that very character becoming the victim of our own success.

The immediate and justifiable concerns of the Clairemont/Great Lakes residents surrounding the 315 W. Ponce development, which deal with issues of building height and traffic problems, stem from the same tensions and provoke the same questions posed by recent news of Decatur’s considered annexation towards Avondale and N. Decatur Rd.

How many residents can the city support? How many residents do we want to support?

If initial concerns are any indication (see the comments in this GoDeKalb article), current residents opposed to population growth are worried that city schools won’t be able to handle an influx of 500 new families (mostly from the residential Forrest Hills neighborhood), while those residents who favor the annexation will see the potential commercial property tax along N. Decatur as a boon for the city’s coffers.

So, how can the city address these new issues in the on-going population growth debate?

In terms of the annexation, the city needs to show residents how the school system can absorb 500 new families and remain on course to achieve its goal of becoming “one of the top ten school districts in the nation”. Only then will residents even consider shouldering Forrest Hills as feasible. If residents can’t be convinced of this, the expansion plan may lose support and have to rule out the move east and an impending fight with Avondale (I referenced this potential fight in my previous entry on this subject…but the AJC reiterates it this morning.) and focus on the slight extension north to N. Decatur Rd.

In regards to upward growth, it seems that allowing C2 commercial zoning to build to a height of 80′ when adjacent to R60 is a continuous recipe for animosity. Though there aren’t many of these areas left undeveloped in town, perhaps the city should consider bringing down building heights in these select locations to avoid future conflict.

Stay tuned. There’s sure to be a lot more on these effects of being too darn popular in the coming days.