Decaturish has a great, in-depth article on an annexation request included on the Decatur City Commission’s agenda for next Monday, so I won’t duplicate efforts.
The request is being made by residents of the Parkwood neighborhood, which has long been bisected – in many cases right through the center of properties – by the Decatur city line on the west side of the city (Google Map). There’s a map showing the city line running through the neighborhood on page 5 of their submitted petition.
Anyway, back to the Decaturish article. I’ll just get you started…
A group of Parkwood neighborhood residents wants the city of Decatur to annex their homes.
Andy Vocaire, spokesman for the Parkwood Neighborhood, said homeowners filed a petition with the city last week.
The city posted a copy of the petition on its website. To read it, click here.
City Commissioners will consider accepting the petition at their Monday meeting. If the annexation effort is successful, it could add 76 homes to the city of Decatur.
Map courtesy of Parkwood Garden Club website
Thanks for the link sir. I thought your readers would be interested to know that my new site went up today and, as a result, some of my old URLs are acting funny. Here’s the correct one http://www.decaturish.com/parkwood-neighborhood-seeks-annexation-into-decatur/
Thanks man. I’ve corrected the link in the post above.
I’d have to think the City will decline this right, given it’s all single family residential and would further burden a school system running out of room to grow?
You’d think. But has the city commission EVER turned down a request for annexation?
I’d be interested to see the total number of annexations in the past 3 years, all done quietly, a few parcels at a time. Usually this means a winfall of 70-100K property value to the lucky owners, often involving contingent sales. A kid here, a kid there, pretty soon it adds up.
There are 7 more on conway scheduled to be approved at tuesdays meeting.
I did a tally once, and there have been at least 40. At one time, you could say that the Commission simply wasn’t attuned to the impact on CSD (and therefore on the taxes of their constituents) but they are well aware now and have not seemed the least bit fazed. Just poor policy. We do have some new commissioners so maybe we’ll see some new questions being raised.
Judd, that’s exactly right. It’s like the city commission doesn’t think about the schools at all when they continue to annex these parcels here and there (and this is a LOT of parcels; most of the neighborhood is *not* already in the city limits). It’s one thing if we had space in the schools, but we do NOT.
I’ve said for at least two years that without any annexation at all, the student population will continue to grow quickly. Most ppl moving into the city today are families with children, so with just the existing houses, we will have more and more kids in the system. *Then* there are all of the mixed-use developments that will be built over the next few years. There will surely be kids living there, too. We don’t have to annex a single house, and we will *still* have school crowding (remember we already need to DOUBLE the middle school and high school to accommodate the kids who are here now, and hopefully the city commission will allow the bond referendum to take place this fall–unlike this past fall when they voted against it). There’s just no reason to annex this many houses at the time.
It’s also un-Decatur-like policy. Decatur rightfully prides itself on long term planning with plenty of analysis. These small annexations (this one not so small) are ad hoc with zero impact analysis. Each in isolation is no big deal, but it adds up to a substantial impact. At least ask City and CSD staff for an impact analysis on this policy. Due diligence.
BTW: If memory serves from a CSD report last year, on average (emphasis on average) each child enrolled in CSD requires $650K in property value.
Judd, surely you’ve not forgotten about the Blue Ribbon Committee? If I understood Mayor Baskett’s proposal correctly, in a mere 6 months’ time, this super committee will be able to process and advise on every conceivable factor that could possibly affect our schools.
It would really be helpful to have that school analysis before considering annexing in so many more residential parcels. Why can’t we wait to annex (or not) when we have that information? Making significant irrevocable decisions without the necessary information is bad policy.
But why base decisions with multi-century impacts on what are really just temporary conditions? For example, I’ve been in my house for 18 years. In that time, I’ve contributed maybe $50 or $60K towards our schools.
Our plan is to retire here and stay in our home so let’s say I’m an average guy and live another 30 years. In that time, I’ll likely contribute another $90 or $100K, for a total of up to roughly $160 paid towards CSD. Meanwhile, the total cost to educate my one child for her entire academic tenure will end up being around $90K in local costs. So I’m still going to depart this fine city revenue-positive. In a pretty substantial way.
Just because we can count a kid or multiple kids in a house today, that’s a floating variable that will vary greatly over time. Which is why I find using a kid-count at the per-parcel level in annexation analysis, as though it were a constant, to be one of the most obnoxious, anti-community behaviors of all time. I know some of the numbers folks among us disagree, and that’s fine, but at some point these folks are no longer data. They’re neighbors.
Now, now. No need to call one another the most obnoxious of all time in defense of community. Unless you were referring to straw man.
You and I may have a different sense of how serious the enrollment problems facing CSD is now. No one has a centuries long vision so I can’t take that seriously. This is our community, yours and mine, here and now, and it faces real, serious, and at least in part quantifiable challenges. I’d like to see our representatives be good stewards of what we have.
T’is not the individual but rather the action that qualifies as obnoxious. I just can’t get comfortable with it.
Not only should we decline it, but we should kick the other half of Parkwood OUT of the city. Total power move. Prevent future mischief.
Whenever I start to get a little too proud of my city someone posts a comment on this blog that brings me back to earth.
Decatur needs to show its mack hand is strong. Decatur giveth, and Decatur taketh away, baby.
Noooooo…. Too many Decatur Hometown Heroes from “our” half of Parkwood. Noooo….
OK you can stay. But keep your nose clean, Parkwood.
I was surprised to read the addition of 76 homes ” . . . would initially add between 8 and 10 students currently zoned for DeKalb County schools.” Suggests to me the neighborhood’s residents are either older or younger than average (most likely the former). Of course my perspective may be a bit skewed since here in Oakhurst you can’t sneeze without getting one of our fertile Myrtles pregnant.
Within the first 8 houses on 3rd Ave, alone, we have about 14 kids—most of whom are enrolled in CSD . . .
With the present Parkwood numbers, I’d guess this annexation would be revenue positive at present, but can’t help but believe there won’t be a progression to the mean that will add many more students to the school system over the next few years.
Regardless, I’ve always had a fondness for Parkwood, and considered it an honorary part of our fair city. Good luck.
Not familiar with the houses in that area, but would not a lot of them end up as tear-downs if they were annexed? I’m assuming a number of people would sell once their assessed values went up.
that’s entirely possible. also, many of the lots on the east side (and a good number on the west) of Parkwood are quite large and would, from a developer’s viewpoint, justify building significantly larger homes there. if my instinct re: older average residents is accurate, there will likely be some natural turnover in those properties over the next decade and we’ll see that happen.
note: i like the present character of the neighborhood with its modest sized ranches on largish lots . . . but i’ve seen what Decatur Fever does to people . . .
Some of them are small 1960s brick tear downs but many were upscale for their time and surprisingly big and often remodeled quite nicely on the the inside.
That section of Parkwood is zoned for the excellent Fernbank Elementary, so a lot of those homes are sized for families, expensive and most definitely not tear-downs. Not every old house needs to be torn down, contrary to the view of many in Decatur. I’d take a solid 1940s or ’50s brick house with a basement over a contemporary builder in-fill any day.
correction: ” . . .can’t help but believe there WILL be a progression to the mean . . .”
I cut thru that neighborhood all the time and all I see is baby buggies & toddlers being escorted by 20/30 somethings. That neighborhood has completely turned over so there is a new wave of kids on the horizon. We can’t even keep up now – KEEP THE TRAILERS off the playgrounds!
I’s exhausted I better get a cold one & calm down……
+1
I have no idea what neighborhood you’re “cutting through”, but it’s obviously not Parkwood. I know i of perhaps 4 pre-school age children and maybe 8 school age children in our neighborhood. I don’t know how many of those are in private schools. I would estimate that the school taxes on 76 additional homes would work out to $40,000 per student, at a conservative estimate. Surely, Decatur can work out some way to make that work.
There are probably more children in 4 houses in Oakhurst than in all of the Parkwood neighborhood.
I am not directionally impaired and can count. While i don’t think those numbers seem real that can’t account for the potential of sales to those families (with kids) wanting into DCS. The inflated $ will not buy space in the schools NEXT year.
Is there any move afoot for Avondale Estates and Decatur to merge into one city? Avondale seems like it has good school buildings in the city or adjacent to the city and wants good middle and high schools. It also seems like there is better concentration of commercial there, which Decatur wants. Is this not a good fit?
The AE residents I know wouldn’t welcome even the suggestion of being merged with Decatur–and why would they? They like their little town having its own identity, possibilities for growth, etc. Plus, their taxes are still lower than ours…if a merger were ever to happen, that would change overnight.
Yes, but they don’t have any local schools. Everyone is bused to other locales (Druid Hills). Would be a nice to add a middle and high school to our mix.
the Avondalians are a proud and mighty people, but i would respectfully submit, their downtown wouldn’t have lain fallow for the last two decades had they been part of Decatur. our folks downtown know how to work a plan.
they would accrue more benefit than schools if they joined our tribe.
come, Avondalians, join us
mingle your sons and daughters with ours
drink our beer, eat our fine foods
stagger, dance, and clap irrhythmically at our festivals
join us comrades
mix your blue ways with ours
add your voice to our kvetching chorus
together, we will build a shining librul city on the hill
a bastion of indie pedants that has no rival
Hahahahaha. That wins the award for best DM post ever in my mind…. or at least top 2.
LOL! I definitely need me some of what Julian’s smokin’…
Oh, you mean like that Avondale MARTA station LCI plan that has been on the books since 2003? Way to work a plan. Of course, probably MARTA’s fault more than anything.
fret not, Avondalian, our white horse is mounted:
http://atlanta.curbed.com/archives/2013/03/19/dusty-avondale-marta-mixeduse-plans-are-being-reborn.php#more
http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/print-edition/2013/03/15/avondale-project-would-lift-decatur.html?page=all
MARTA also just hired a great new director of transit oriented development- they are serious about leveraging their developable land sooner rather than later now that the economy is improving.
Can anyone say Daycare in this particular project?
This Avondalian says thanks but no thanks. I’m sure this applies to many Avondale residents: if we wanted to live in Decatur, we would be there already. We can still be friends, though.
DeKalb County owns those schools not the City of Avondale Estates. The buildings would not come as part of the deal with annexation. Decatur would need to purchase them (at great expense I’d guess) from the County.
Is there any move afoot for Avondale Estates and Decatur to merge into one city? Avondale seems like it has good school buildings in the city or adjacent to the city and wants good middle and high schools. It also seems like there is better concentration of commercial there, which Decatur wants. Is this not a good fit?
Annexing another park is not awful, though that is a lot of kid potential.
I really hope we do NOT decide to annex the Parkwood neighborhood. We can’t fit all of the students we have now. Why in the world would we annex a section that is only homes and not businesses? I cannot think of a single reason that Decatur should annex these houses.
And regarding all the small annexations that happen – a house here and there, a few houses at a time – how nice for those homeowners whose homes are significantly more valuable overnight due to annexation. Sneaking in to the city via small annexation, without paying the real cost to live in the city, is certainly one way to build wealth…
And quite frankly, these people have some nerve asking to join a city whose school system is under pressure and can’t handle all the kids who already actually live in the city limits. It’s selfish, pure and simple. Wanting something for nothing.
In this case, I don’t think it is asking for something for nothing. Parkwood will end up in one of the new cities if not Decatur- I think they are picking the devil they know. But on the extra appreciation front, it would be interesting to see if there is a way for the city to share in that, with the extra funds going to city infrastructure/capital projects. Not sure how it would work. ideas? Unconstitutional?
The city would share in the extra appreciation front via 76 new houses from which it can now collect city taxes.
It would be a net LOSS for the city.
how so?
i don’t know the per capita cost of non-education related services like trash, police, etc. but it seems to me adding that many properties to our tax digest with so few school children is a net gain.
what’s the basis for your “LOSS”?
Education, I’d wager.
I am a Parkwood resident and a candidate for annexation. Your assertion that we are seeking “something for nothing” is a bit ridiculous. Many of us, like me, have lived in this neighborhood for decades. We live within walking distance of downtown Decatur and Oakhurst. Most of us spend a considerable amount of our time and money patronizing Decatur’s shops, restaurants and bars. We attend the concerts and events, we use the library, we get married there.
Although we are nominally part of the Druid Hills neighborhood, we are physically closer to Decatur, and many of us identify as Decatur residents.
Annexation into Decatur will mean significantly higher taxes for us. Because most of us are dedicated to our neighborhood, we are not looking to cash in on any appreciation we realize in our home values. Most of us are here for the long term. As far as the idea that we will be candidates for tear-downs and rebuilds, we hope that will not happen. The fact is that half of our neighborhood is already within the city and that part of the neighborhood has had no tear-downs, infill or rebuilds. There’s no reason why annexation of the other half should change that.
As has been noted, we have very few children. The fact is that Decatur comes out the big winner here. Decatur gets the park that we have worked to restore, a large inflow of our tax money, with just a handful of additional children in the schools. We get a big tax bill and a negligible increase in services.
After much agonizing and debate, a majority of Parkwood residents have chosen to be annexed into Decatur. Our main motivation is that the alternative is to be annexed into the City of Atlanta or into some Frankencity yet to be created. We are and have been part of Decatur every sense but the legal one. It is petty and small-minded for current residents of Decatur to choose to pull up the drawbridge when we want to come in.
See, this right here? This is how you do it. A thoughtful, reasoned case. I wouldn’t want to be part of LakeBriarKalb either, I don’t think.
The Secessionist Ghettos aren’t even real cities. They have no character, no culture, no concept of self beyond RAWR RAWR TAXES.
Kudos to the folks in Parkwood for being proactive.
I haven’t heard anyone else suggest this, but I think the winter storm debacle may have a chilling effect on the city-hood movement, at least this legislative year. More than a few observers have pointed out the already large number of “fiefdoms” in metro Atlanta and the lack of regional coordination.
Heh, yes. Because Brookhaven was SO MUCH BETTER PREPARED THAN DEKALB COUNTY.
Speak for yourself, I know a co-worker that signed up so they could move on – cash in hand & no City taxes in his future.
“Speak for yourself”
Wait- So Woody who apparently lives on, and has history on Parkwood, should only speak for himself, but because you share an employer with one person on Parkwood, your comment trumps relevance and is more representative of Parkwoodian peeps than his? Just making sure i got that right?
Woody, we are not trying to “pull up the drawbridge.” If you want to live in Decatur, you are more than welcome to move within the current city limits.
Look at the map that you all included in your annexation petition. Nearly all of East and West Parkwood are not currently within the city limits. That is a lot of houses.
You also say that you will get a “negligible increase in service” for the higher taxes you will pay. Really? Are you sure about that? You’ll be getting quite a lot – fire and police that respond within minutes, as opposed to waiting around for a while for DeKalb County officials. The city services are way better than the county ones (which I’m sure you realize), so don’t say you won’t get much out of paying more taxes. Please. In addition, your houses will go up significantly in value, so be realistic in the gains you will realize. You will also get a top-notch school system (way better than the one you have now)! It’s definitely a win for your neighborhood and a loss for the city, primarily based on schools, which are ALREADY FULL with the students who already live in the city limits.
Have you actually checked house prices over there or are you just assuming that Decaturism will bring an increase in property value? Many of those houses are in the $700,000-$800,000 range already and are size wise similar houses in that range in Oakhurst. In fact, I’d say across the board the housing stock is already priced similarly to Oakhurst. Druid Hills, even this side, is not exactly a shabby address. The increase in property value argument just doesn’t hold water if you know anything about housing prices in Druid Hills. I made an off the cuff comment about those housing prices rising and I take it back.
Take a quick look at Zillow.com for an idea. There are a number of homes listed that are way below your $700K-$800K range; these houses have values in the high $200Ks, $300Ks, and $400Ks.
Yes, these homes are technically in Druid Hills and are therefore not inexpensive, but all houses go up in value when they’re annexed in and therefore have the benefit of better city services and great schools. I’m not sure why you’d suggest this wouldn’t happen here.
I did take a look at Zillow. The prices are similar to the rest of Decatur age and condition.
Zillow is a poor indicator of value especially in a unique area such as ours. It basically uses the county appraisal data which we all know to be flawed. I’ve seen homes undervalued on zillow by a few $100k.
Keith, agreed – Zillow isn’t perfect, but it’s a place to start for most ppl. It clearly doesn’t “get” Decatur and its surrounding areas, but that’s not surprising bc it’s rather unique.
I think you’re both right. Some houses in Parkwood are upscale mega-split levels and some are modest split levels. Those that are large and recently updated will sell for a couple of hundred thousand more than the modest homes.
NellieBelle,
That’s because for many years it was much preferred to be OUTSIDE of Decatur city limits. On the north side of the city limits, there are still neighborhoods that are more expensive than Decatur. They haven’t declined in value just because Decatur has increased.
“without paying the real cost to live in the city”
Couldn’t this notion be true of many condo and town-home owners, compared to single-family home owners? (Not in every case obviously) Where does this notion end? What is the “real cost” btw and how do you go about making the decision of who has paid it? Interesting line of thought for sure.
When I wrote “the real cost to live in the city,” I was talking about the fact that houses in Decatur cost significantly more than those outside of the city, in unincorporated DeKalb. Anyone who buys within the city limits is paying a premium for that. That’s true whether you live in a house or condo. The people who live in a condo certainly paid more for that condo than a similar one in unincorporated DeKalb would cost, for example. So anyone who buys his/her house/condo within the city limits is paying the “real price” to live in the city. Those who bought outside of the city limits did not pay the real price of entry, so to speak (they’re lucky, though, b/c their houses will pretty much immediately be worth more thanks to the annexation).
The taxes ppl pay are not actually always relevant/up-to-date for their current house (I’m pretty sure it’s the county that figures out the appraisal value). As an example, we have friends who live on Feld and have a small, unrenovated house. They fight every year to lower their appraisal and taxes bc they are one of the smallest (original) houses on the street but pay the most in taxes. In other words, the county isn’t great at estimating the right price for all of these renovated houses that are way larger than they were, and therefore worth a lot more.
And here’s how it’s related to this situation – we will have more kids in the CROWDED school system thanks to this Parkwood annexation, if it goes through. We need money to cover the cost of educating these additional kids (and from a school funding perspective, this annexation will likely be a negative-add bc the children will cost more to educate than the taxes will bring in). If the county could at least figure the tax appraisal with the “Decatur bump” in mind, it would help with school funding a bit. Otherwise, it’s a loss for the school system. A school system that is already bursting at the seams and needs more students like it needs a hole in the head.
I am not so sure this annexation is revenue negative. This neighborhood (I live there, in the City) is not Oakhurst. You have a “typical” age distribution with people ranging from their 20’s to 80’s. You could look at the City side of the neighborhood to estimate the impact to the school system. I don’t think you are going to see a mass exodus of people if the annexation occurs, so the numbers of school age kids should follow historical patterns. The lots are big and the housing stock is well built and well maintained. I think lots of tear downs is unlikely.
The thing about the school system is we are becoming overcrowded regardless of annexation. We need money. If the Parkwood annexation brings in more money than it costs in additional services, the City should go for it.
Lastly, this process has been hard for the unincorporated part of the neighborhood, but the majority has spoken and they are asking in. It has always been weird to have half the neighborhood in the City and half out. Annexation will, in the long run, bring the neighborhood even more together.
Annexation may bring your neighborhood together, but at the expense of the school system/city overall–bc you are right, and as I said, we’re already overcrowded and will continue to be, even without annexation. So why would we annex *even more* residential parcels? Why make the problem worse?
CH Family,
I’ll give you a very good reason on why we need to annex. It seems there are two options being discussed for keeping up with the school population: annex to get more taxe revenue or increase property taxes. As a revenue positive family living within the city, I am not willing to take on more taxes to support the school system. My large home is ripe for a large family to move into, and if the only option is to raise my taxes, I’m cashing out. Eventually you will have an extremely high concentration of families, and as Peggy Merriss suggested, no ability to annex because newly formed cities have taken over adjacent properties.
I’m happy to have further conversation on how, where, when it is best to annex additional areas, but I really am quite tired of parents already living within the city having this “no more property (read: kids) can come in” mentality. I think that is a very one-sided view of this discussion with bad consequences.
This opens up a great line of conversation, especially in terms of resistance to downtown development. If we can’t find ways of diversifying our tax base with disproportionately revenue-positive development (or annexation, I s’pose, if it pencils), we’ll have no choice but to further heap the burden on single family homes. Many of those homes are currently occupied by folks without kids and are presently revenue positive. But raise the taxes, as Curious says, and some percentage may leave, opening up their kid-friendly homes to new, incoming families. So not only do isolationist or anti-development policies fail to solve our financial issues, they actually incentivize the type of demographic monoculture we’re trying to avoid.
Yes sir! And based on the conversations I saw taking place in this post and the other DM post quoting Phylis Edwards, I already alerted the spouse to this very real and upcoming possiblity.
We have at least 6 revenue positive families in my neighborhood, and based on conversations with some neighbors, the exodus might be faster than people realize. I can sell my home much faster than a developer can renovate another for a new family, probably giving schools a larger problem virtually overnight.
And the tree ordiance to-be would not matter either!
Curious,
You say that these are the two options for more tax revenue: “annex to get more taxe [sic] revenue or increase property taxes.” You are forgetting an important third option (annexing non-residential property) as well as not fully understanding what you listed as the first option (which appears to mean annex more residences as in this Parkwood situation).
Annexing houses – which does include adding more children to the city – does not help *at all* with the school situation (and actually makes it worse). Yes, we’ll get more property taxes, along with lots of kids for the school system (and while Parkwood claims to have only a few kids now, just wait and see what happens in the near future). What we need to take the burden off of homeowners is more non-residential property, such as businesses, that generate tax revenue. People have known and said that for years. Annexing more homes doesn’t solve the problem – it makes it worse!
And I’m sorry you don’t like the “no more property (read: kids) can come in” mentality. **Our schools cannot handle the kids already in the system. The middle school and high school need to be doubled. Why add more homes/kids into the mix to make a bad problem even worse?**
I did not move into Decatur to live in an exclusive community. I whole-heartedly disagree the only solution is to cherry-pick commercial-only property. What is the formal process to do that anyway? Does it occur quickly?
BTW, I’m not for or against Parkwood being annexed. Just like the tree-ordinance discussion, we need to have a community conversation about this issue. As I understand, there have been and continue to be several residential homes constantly being annexed into the City. Did you know that is taking place? I would rather have a larger discussion, with all sides represented, to come up with the best plan for future growth.
Or we can just do it your way, sit on our hands, and say no. I’m going to end up in the black regardless.
Curious, yes, I am aware that the city continues to annex residential properties here and there when those properties request it, regardless of what that means for the overcrowded school system. And you’re right – it would be great to have a larger, big-picture conversation about all annexation and what it means not only for the schools but also the other various factors. I think the reason this annexation stands out is that it is such a LARGE number of homes.
Someone else said if we are going to start annexing, why don’t we annex the homes around the city borders that are already partially within the city limits. That makes more sense before taking on an additional neighborhood of homes.
Our city’s problem has been that we are too residential-heavy, making the homeowner tax burden too great. Bringing in even MORE residences only makes this problem worse. If we were annexing in both commercial and residential parcels, that would be one thing, but this annexation would mean we’d have an even greater residential-heavy situation.
I can’t imagine how annexation of Parkwood would be revenue positive. To be revenue positive, the appraised value has to be quite high for a home with a couple of kids in CSD schools. The number I’ve heard is around $800k.
The pattern with other annexed neighborhoods is for the older residents with no school-age kids to cash out & sell to a family. So you could assume the area would soon become chock full of children.
Agreed,
“The people who live in a condo certainly paid more for that condo than a similar one in unincorporated DeKalb would cost, for example.”
That’s for damn sure. Though I can’t think of any mid-rises in unincorporated DeKalb like those downtown.
Brianc,
As you say, there are condos in downtown that are mid-rise, which is pretty unique to Decatur. There are also the same townhomes that you’d find anywhere else in unincorporated DeKalb. Ppl pay a premium for the mid-rise condos b/c they can only be found in the city, and ppl pay more for the townhomes b/c they are within the city, not outside.
Bottom line – if you want to live in Decatur and actually buy within the current city limits, you pay quite a premium for that. Those who are outside of the city limits are not in that situation.
Houses in City of Decatur not cost more than houses in unincorporated. There are swaths of unincorporated DeKalb with huge clusters of houses in the millions (Druid Hills and some in the Emory area, just around here) are still sections of Decatur (College Heights area, Sycamore Heights, and yes parts of Oakhurst) with small, WWII area housing stock that are relatively inexpensive. You are making a lot of blankets statements without facts to back said statements. I am usually against annexation, but this one seems natural and if the driving force is the fact that Parkwood is going forced into one of these mini cities, I don’t blame them.
Nelliebelle1997, why are you usually against annexation?
Of course there are expensive parts of DeKalb County outside the city of Decatur. There are also many parts of the county that are near the city and cost a lot less as a result. Bring them into the city limits, and they cost a while lot more.
And I’m not sure why you think there are plenty of inexpensive homes in Oakhurst. Have you checked prices in that part of town?
“There are also many parts of the county that are near the city and cost a lot less as a result. Bring them into the city limits, and they cost a while lot more.”
I am not sure this is true. On Pensdale Road, for example, a portion of the street is within COD and a portion is not. I don’t see any price differential — certainly not the material differential you’re describing — based on whether the home is over the COD border or not. I’m sure there are other border neighborhhods where this is true.
DEM, if those homes outside of the city limits on Pensdale were annexed, you would certainly see a jump in their value, The Decatur bump. But we wouldn’t know that for sure unless we annexed those homes, too, while we’re annexing so many others…
You’re assuming that. I am saying that if you look at their actual prices and estimates, there’s no visible discount for being just outside the COD boundary. The estimates may be off, sure, but I believe there are several homes on Pensdale alone that actually sold for prices that are pretty much the same as you’d expect to see if they were within COD.
If your theory were correct, you’d be able to find clear evidence of it in these boundary neighborhhods — i.e., home inside COD sells for X, similar home just outside COD sells for X-Y. Maybe that exists, but there’s definitely some reason to doubt it.
nelliebelle: “I am usually against annexation, but this one seems natural and if the driving force is the fact that Parkwood is going forced into one of these mini cities, I don’t blame them.”
But nelliebelle, will you be as ready to apply it to other nearby neighborhoods? This year’s annexation quest may go quite differently. Where last year the City appeared very willing to force unincorporated DeKalb residents into our boundaries to get to the commercial properties, now that it’s looking to be an established city vs. new city option, the residents in the targeted areas may now be viewing things the same way as the Parkwood folks. What’s your take on all that?
(Also, I believe you meant to say Decatur Heights, not Sycamore Heights. Unless that’s our fictional soap opera name. :0)
Damn right it’s selfish for them to want to be incorporated into a great city rather than the City of Atlanta or some new unknown entity. In fact, I’d say it’s almost as selfish as your reasons for wanting to keep them out!
J_T,
If I lived in a neighborhood outside the city and knew that that city could not already house the students it has, I’d feel pretty audacious asking to join that city by adding a significant number of additional homes to the city.
Do you want to volunteer your home for the middle school and high school students/classes that won’t fit in the middle and high school buildings? In less than five years, we know that that middle and high school populations will double – based on the kids already in the system, already here. Where will we put those kids? And then we want to add even MORE homes and MORE kids? How does that work? What is your plan? As a homeowner you’ll be paying even more in taxes to house those additional students.
CH, in reviewing your litany of postings, I’ve come to the conclusion that you must have remorse over the amount you paid to live within the esteemed and impenetrable walls of COD.
Yes, sure, you can have my home to house those kids. That’s clearly the only solution.
I’ll be paying more in taxes whether we annex or not. Ideally, there will be a fair mix of commercial and residential annexation to offset those increased taxes. Even without any commercial annexation, it’s still an open question as to whether this proposed annexation would be revenue negative, neutral or (admittedly unlikely) positive compared to the status quo. I’d like to see those numbers before saying “Sorry, our door is closed!”
The bottom line is that two things are true:
1. We need to expand our school facilities.
2. Annexation is going to happen.
There seems to be better ways to reconcile these two truths than to simply ignore one of them.
I have no clue about the financial benefit, but annexing the rest of Parkwood would be a big plus on the canopy side. Tons of big trees, especially along the creek.
Smith, I think you’re onto something… Maybe households with school-age kids should have to bring extra trees to the table?
DM, this comment introduces the idea that the challenges facing our city — trees, schools, affordable housing, annexation — are often interrelated and don’t exist in simple, black/white silos. Such acknowledgement of reality has no place in a comment stream. Please remove.
+1
I am usually anti-annexation but this makes sense to me, especially since there are a good number of people with screwed up property lines. There are also a number of families I know over there with kids in private school- and no intention of moving them. I doubt many of the houses would qualify for teardown, either. Too expensive now and CSD would only increase the value. Of course, one friend over there would hate to give up his Decatur and DeKalb trash days!
On the screwed up property lines- There’s a number of partial properties scattered throughout the City. To me, the right thing to do would be for the City to fix all of these situations first (yes, by annexing) before considering whether or not to add more residential properties from outside the current city limits.
Deanne, that makes a lot of sense.
Two random observations,
1) Hardly a week goes by when a call on the police/fire scanner includes a discussion of whether or not an address in Parkwood is in Decatur or not. To Decatur’s credit, they usually respond first and sort it out w Dekalb second.
2) Parkwood Park is owned and maintained by the Parkwood Garden Club (their civic association). And they seem to do a good job at it (just from my regular bike commutes by there). Do they have any expectation of the city playing a role?
Personally, I am all for intact neighborhoods. They make for better and more functional communities. It would also make for a cleaner city boundary.
“Parkwood Park” as a name has gotta go, though.
i’ve always been partial to “West Ponce/Eastlake Shortcut”
pithy
functional
what’s not to love?
No love for North Parkwood?
Ah, yes, check out the Decatur city boundary as it approaches and meanders down North Parkwood Road. It cuts through the middle of Venetian, follows the creek a bit (I think), goes down the middle of the street for a while, and then goes to the CSX right-of-way.
Are all Parkwoods not created equal?
Not until you depose that dastardly Kim Jong-il and ban his toady, Dennis Rodman!
Oh, wait, that’s North Korea… sorry, my bad.
I share the concerns about the effect of annexation and development on our schools. I think they will have a snowball effect on enrollment. I just looked at the plans for a new townhouse development in Oakhurst–4 bedrooms and 3.5 baths; that design fits families as well as the childless. Families in condos and townhouses could become the new norm in Decatur, like in some cities. Meanwhile, older homes in annexed areas, even the bigger and nicer ones, will become popular with young families starting out in the housing market.
On the other hand, I know some of the families who became part of CSD through the small, piece meal annexations that have occurred over the last decade. The parents are quite devoted to CSD and community service; they appreciate what they have more than many of us long-term residents. Their students are top performers who make our test scores look good; if they hadn’t been annexed into Decatur, they’d probably be stars at some private school. Their annexation sure feels like a net gain for our city.
Looking at the layout of streets, yards, and greenspace, Parkwood is a natural self-contained community. I can see why Parkwood residents would prefer being co-located in the same city and school system vs. the current situation which has to diminish their sense of neighborhood and community. Even splitting streets between elementary schools within the City of Decaur changes some of the neighborhood dynamics. This annexation seems to have more rationale than many others.
I should think the North Parkwood neighborhood could mount their own petition drive to move the boundary to the CSX line, but they are not part of the effort already underway. The Parkwood Garden Club (aka neighborhood association) membership does not extend across Ponce and Scott to N Parkwood.
Smith is exactly right. The northern part of North Parkwood is in the city limits, and the southern part down to Ponce is not (I don’t think it’s really part of any neighborhood – not Druid Hills, not Parkwood, not Chelsea Heights – it’s odd). I know a family on that street outside of the city limits, and the mom says that she (and her neighbors) are quite happy NOT paying the city taxes bc they are happy with Fernbank, that they get the amenities of the city without having to pay for them, etc. (Amenities as in they’re close to downtown and can easily enjoy the restaurants, shops, city events, etc.)
I have to say that, IF Parkwood proper is all annexed into Decatur or already in the city and north North Parkwood is already in the city, then it will be an obvious next step for south North Parkwood to be annexed, as long as the majority of residents want it. Annexation does seem to have a domino effect.
I would guess that 55% percent of the homes on North Parkwood lie within Decatur city limits while the remainder is part of Druid Hills (and subject to historic preservation Certificates of Appropriateness issues). For one stretch, home on opposite sides of the street are in different entities as the border shifts around. I believe all are within 30030.
Dave, I know folks are talking about the likelihood of annexing the southern part of North Parkwood into the city if we add East and West Parkwood (and the northern part of North Parkwood is already in the city). But the few families I know along that stretch LOVE Fernbank b/c it is right behind their houses. They walk over the train and through the woods for maybe 3 minutes to get to Fernbank. Those families I know have no interest in paying city taxes. So we’ll see. But it would make sense, though, from a “natural boundary” perspective, to add the rest of North Parkwood to the city.
I’ve asked this before but still don’t understand: Why does the City tend to approve annexations of residential properties? I understand that the disadvantages impact CSD more directly than the City. But what’s the incentive or motive for the City? It can’t be just lack of disincentives, right? I also understand that there’s recently a preemptive, defensive rationale–annex a property before another City/entity does. But that’s only a recent motive, right? The City’s been annexing residential properties for a while
At Home in Decatur, it makes no sense to me, either. There’s no benefit to annexing more residential.
To be clear, I’m not saying that the City’s approach to annexation doesn’t make sense; I just don’t understand it yet. I am cautious about annexation in light of our school system’s tight enrolment situation but I also have seen some benefits to our school community. Annexing the non-City part of Parkwood seems like a particularly good fit for annexation–the neighborhood is unnaturally split between two jurisdictions. It’s more than than just the usual rationale of contiguity. What other incentives does the City have besides uniting a neighborhood and preemptively annexing before another jurisdiction does? That’s what I want to understand, the City’s perspective, incentives, motives, agenda.
At Home in Decatur, it would certainly be nice to know more about the things you’ve mentioned. To understand the city’s rationale in annexation of more residential. But that’s not happening, so we are in the dark. There seems to be no analysis of the effect of annexation. And if that analysis exists, no one is being transparent about it. You’re right – maybe it does all make sense – we have no idea b/c we have no information.
As someone from a very revenue positive household who happily pays for other peoples’ kids to go to school even though we don’t have any, I hope the knee-jerk, close the borders, we’ve got ours and you’re not welcome to the party response does not win out. To be honest, after living here 20 years, I had no idea that the area in question was not already within City of Decatur. I knew that North Parkwood was split but I thought that the entirety of East and West Parkwood was already in COD.
It makes total sense from a viewpoint of neighborhood continuity for it to be annexed. If the remainder of unincorporated DeKalb is going to be incorporated at some point, it seems like this is certainly part of our share. I don’t know how the equation of tax dollars versus increased burden on our schools will tip, but we should at least look at the real numbers rather than summarily dismissing residential annexation.
On the other hand, the idea of protectionist isolationism does sound a bit appealing if we would be able to build a moat around the city. I’ve always wanted a moat. With all the rain forecast for the next two weeks, we might even be able to fill it for free if we start digging now…
And we could ice skate on the moat during polar vortices.
Yeah! We could fill it with polar bears during polar vortices (and have alligators during the warm seasons)!
At first, I’m thinking that could work because the ‘gators would just hunker down in the mud during the winter. But where would the bears go during the summer? And wait, the way our temps flip-flop all winter, we’d be having warm spells when the gators would wake up… Hmmm, wonder who’d win in a polar bear-alligator match? That’s something to ponder.
We could send the bears back up North for the summer, or just import some big ice floes to keep ’em cool. (We could keep them supplied with cold beer, too, to keep them docile. 😀 )
Now, gator vs. polar bear–hmmmm…gators have those immensely strong jaws & wicked strong tails, but the bears outweigh them by at least a few hundred pounds, & those paws can smack a caribou’s head clean off. I’d have to give it to the polar bear in the end, but I’m guessing the gator would probably get a few really good bites in before it was all over.
Pretty sure the polar bears would win when it’s cold. Doesn’t the metabolism of a reptile slow way down in the cold?
I was thinking that. But then, weather cold enough to slow down an alligator is still way too warm for a polar bear to be comfortable. Possibly, our winters would just make them all too sluggish to be any fun at all.
I would be fine with it if every single homeowner in that area agrees. Otherwise, nope.
That sets up a scenario where that one neighbor who’s just kind of a jerk holds out to screw everyone else over, though.
The annexation discussion has come up so much, I am amazed that the City Commission has not either:
1) Developed, or sought community input, on a set of guiding principles for annexation
OR
2) If they HAVE done so, have not very publicly pointed people to it and/or sought comments.
Strategic plans aside, this issue of annexation and how/why/when is being forced upon us by the cityhood craze in Dekalb.
Whether or not you are for it or annexation, building some common ground and having the commission agree on a set of principles (with input from CSD as well) would make for a more rationale and deliberate process moving forward.
Maybe the Commission among themselves is building such a consensus (note their recent retreat which invited CSD leaders), but at some point engaging the public and developed a set of principles is a much more timely and immediate topic than, say, debating tree canopy.
So very well stated.
For someone who lives in this neighborhood and has been involved in the petition, I think it is important to provide some background here. Even thought this neighborhood is referred to as “The Parkwoods”, it also includes Upland Road, Parkwood Lane and Wimberly Court. Most of the properties were developed in the 40’s and 50’s, and are ranch-style homes that match the era. The portion of the Parkwood neighborhood that is in unincorporated DeKalb is part of the Druid Hills Historic Preservation, whereas the portion of the neighborhood that is currently in Decatur has no historic protections. This is important because as Woody said in an earlier comment, there have been no tear-downs or building of “McMansions” on the City of Decatur side, and we don’t expect there to be any difference with the rest of the properties even if they are removed from Druid Hills. To further that discussion, the City of Decatur is interested in starting a new historic district for the Parkwoods if they are annexed, and that would provide additional protection from tear-downs, major remodels or re-zoning which would not match the neighborhood.
This community is highly organized and maintains the 3.2 acre park known as “Parkwood Park” which most of you seem to be familiar with. This park is actually owned by the Parkwood Garden Club (PGC) which is the neighborhood club that 90% of the residents belong to (that is an official stat, not an approximation).
Per the Decatur School Board, student costs are currently estimated at about $8,000 per year. With that figure, and so few students transitioning from Druid Hills or private schools into Decatur, the tax revenue for the city will be a net positive. The good news though, is that you don’t have to take my word for it. As part of the petition process, Decatur is required to complete a service-impact study which would calculate the cost of students, waste pickup, police, fire and rescue, etc. So to some of the earlier questions, the city will know the full financial impact of this annexation before they have to make any vote to approve it.
We certainly hope that our community can be united under one governing body through this annexation. The other options that have been presented with (Briarcliff, Atlanta or remaining in unincorporated DeKalb) seem to have a much more uncertain future.
The report on Decaturish indicates between eight and 10 students would arrive in CSD initially. If those students are spread out across the grade levels, not a big deal for CSD……..yet. But if they are all preschool and early elementary, then that’s 1/3 to 1/2 of a classroom which requires hiring another teacher. On the other hand, perhaps Parkwood would attend Westchester which will have the lowest student:teacher ratios for a while. Parkwood might quickly fill it up.
There’s no question in my mind that the parts of Decatur (or Parkwood) that are low in younger children right now will soon cycle into teaming with children. We have learned this so many times in Decatur. When you see a decline in school-age students in a neighborhood, you DON’T keep drawing a simple straight-line downward like CSD did in 2004 and project lower enrollment. You prepare for the next inflection in the sine wave as the homes with grown children are bought out by young families who want to live in in town but have been priced out of the areas already teaming with children.
P.S.: A cost of $8,000 per year per student seems low to me. I thought the true annual cost was more like $9,500 and that was a few years ago. There’s public school systems elsewhere in the country that spend $20,000 per year on their students!
At Home in Decatur is exactly right. Just b/c there are evidently few children now does not guarantee anything. Every other house could have two kids within a short time. Look across the rest of the city!
How come this line of thinking is always, “Just because those houses have no kids today doesn’t mean they won’t tomorrow” (a financially negative eventuality) rather than, “Just because those houses have kids today doesn’t mean they won’t graduate to an empty nest tomorrow” (a financially positive eventuality)? Both are recurring and equally plausible.
The frame is always that we should discount facts in our favor because doom is just around the corner. Never that a time of present tension might be followed by a corresponding period of relief. AHID’s point about not drawing an infinite drop every time you have a decrease in enrollment is equally true in reverse. Increasing enrollments are not infinite either. They will peak and the cycle will begin again.
I don’t dispute that CSD is bulging at the seams. I just can’t understand why we’d make extremely long-term decisions based on temporary circumstances. The discussion over this proposal in particular deserves better.
Scott, surely you know that the “bulging” school population is not just a “temporary circumstance.” CSD is pretty much the ONLY VIABLE (public) SCHOOL SYSTEM from k to 12 in the intown area (at least as most ppl perceive it). That’s why our student population has increased so quickly over the last few years. People who are districted for APS and DeKalb County Schools are jumping ship left and right to Decatur. Much of it happens in May-July, especially. And you can’t blame them with APS’s cheating scandal and DeKalb’s many woes (major budget shortfall, possibility of losing accreditation, and half or so of the school board getting kicked out and replaced).
The homes currently within the city limits that sell continue to turn over and end up with more kids in the houses than were there before (due both to the intown moves I mentioned above as well as people relocating to metro Atlanta from out of state). We already have a huge school age population explosion WITHOUT annexing anything. Why annex more when we’re already nearing a crisis point?
Even if we accepted the premise that Decatur was the only “viable” in-town public school system, do you think it’s a permanent circumstance? What if Dunwoody, Brookhaven and other new cities got the ability to create their own school systems? They’re already trying in the legislature this year: http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/get-schooled/2013/dec/30/should-georgia-change-its-constitution-allow-dunwo/
Not taking sides, but interested in folks’ opinions on the potential of City Schools of Dunwoody and its affect on Decatur.
I think it’s pretty unlikely that we’ll see new school systems, but it’s not like all of the schools in DeKalb are bad (far from it), or that the system can’t turn it around.
Forty years ago Decatur schools were considered substandard. Many people wanted them discarded and merged into the county. Luckily, our elected representatives took a long range view and maintained the independent system. This annexation argument requires the same long-range view. The City should consider any residential annexation request that has a long-range upside. The Parkwood neighborhood has homes that have sold in the $1M range. The lots are larger than just about anywhere except maybe Glennwood Estates. I’d call that upside.
You may have a point, but Dunwoody and Brookhaven are not intown cities and currently do not compare with Decatur at all. But yes, it will be interesting to see how the “schools thing” plays out as new cities are created.
Re temporary circumstances going both ways: I agree that things cycle. The nature of a wave function is that neither the top or the bottom of wave should be used in your assumptions. Mid-points are more useful. And a recognition of the fluctuations should be part of the planning. Incremental change with recurrent assessments should occur to see how the projections are holding up, recognize unintended and unexpected effects, scan the changing environment (e.g. demographic shifts), note turning points, and tweak and improve the plan. Unfortunately, neither the assumptions nor the change process were adequate in the early 2000 CSD school closures. For current decisions, I think we have to recognize that there will be substantial impact on CSD with annexations, no matter what the annexation. Over time, that impact will fluctuate between minimal and tremendous but the lowest number of children that an area can have is zero, and zero impact is going to be rare and temporary. Nonetheless there’s also reasons to support specific annexations including the preservation of neighborhoods, tax revenue, and whatever the motivations are for the City to keep approving them.
What’s frustrating for me is that my belief in cyclical, gradual change does not make me any better at predicting exactly WHAT that change will be. Not the magnitude or duration of the cycles nor the new external forces that will dampen or strengthen the fluctuations. I keep thinking that planners ought to be able to do those kind of projections but they often do the policy equivalent of drawing straight lines. All I can contribute is that experience tells me that oversimplification of issues and choices is satsifying in the short run but risky in the long run.
Acceptance of the fact that we don’t know what we don’t know is a pivotal step towards enlightenment, Grasshoppah. Move into the light!
People in the City of Decatur surely understand that the motivation for this petition is the high quality City of Decatur schools. The homes in Parkwood are large sized 3 and 4 bedroom houses. If you want to know the true impact of allowing this annexation, a more relevant question to ask is how many children in the Parkwood neighborhood are under the age of 5? To project the impact of future house sales in this neighborhood, you might ask how many of the houses purchased in Parkwood within the last three years were purchased by families with young children?
Paggwyd, when you put it that way, this potential annexation of 76 homes is even more concerning. And thank you for saying it – it’s primarily the schools that are the driving factor in this annexation. Along with not wanting to be city-less in DeKalb, I’d guess.
We can do better than that. What about a neighborhood watch group that’s on the lookout for the subtle baby bump, then maybe someone can stalk her for a few days to find out if the chick is just fat & happy, or if the sighting was right after she ate a big burrito. Fertility status is also important. I’d suggest a committee of committed do-gooders pretending to be friends with women then asking if they have lazy ovaries, or a tilted cervix, we need to find out a subtle way to ask if the husband is a “one baller,” We need to find out who has fully gone through menopause (not just the beginnings, we can’t rely on her hot flashes, maybe contact her gynecologist and see what they say.) In the case of all couples (even same sex) I suggest learning about their financial affairs. Specifically we need to know if families in question are in the black by at least 100k so we can determine if they have the financial resources to pursue future adoption or have continuous rounds of IVF. When the homeowners leave the room, don’t miss the opportunity to dig through any papers that look important. If we are going to make generalizations on pure speculations, we need to do this right.
When I was young decatur wasn’t what it is now, far from it. However, with good planning it has become better than its history would suggest. That is why my wife and I have worked to get our family here. Our 14 year old attends the highschool and is getting a wonderful education. We hope that our 2 year old and 1 year old will be likewise situated. However, if the city doesn’t continue to provide a great school system we will be the first to move. That is the nature of things. Consequently, while I do not want overcrowding I refuse to be the voice which keeps out people who, like us, just want better for their children.
The only question I have is, with Fernbank and Druid Hill High being some of the better schools in Dekalb county why Decatur? In answer I think it is more about avoiding annexation by other cities than it is our schools.