Nascar Hall of Fame?

[guy4charlotte]

ok I know you guys really wanted this too, but it would have hurt us a lot more than you to lose it...i mean, you have the aquarium, the world of coke, the georgia dome, etc etc etc--ATL is a vibrant internationally known city, while we still struggle with ppl confusing us with Charleston and Charlotteville---so y'all come visit us once a year now maybe and we'll keep coming down to peachtree city all the rest of the year for all ATL has to offer. thanks for those of you on here who have said nice things about CLT

[CarolinaDaydreamin]

ppl confusing us with Charleston and Charlotteville

Good points, but I don't think this happens anymore, just confusing if its NC or SC, which is much more understandable. Quick is Bismark ND or SD?

[krazeeboi]

Bismark is the capital of ND.

Pierre is the capital of SD.

[ironchapman]

Congrats to Charlotte. I have said all along....Charlotte was where the NASCAR HOF belongs.

Yes, indeed. I'll have to come visit when its completed.

But, regarding the last part, I guess we'll have to disagree (Daytona for me).

I'm glad our founders found it appropriate to retool it a little, that's marginally unattractive.

Ah yes, but Atalanta was a famous racer....too bad NASCAR didn't know that

"Think about this,'' Sabates said. "Would you want to go to Atlanta at 8 o'clock at night and walk around by yourself? I told [NASCAR president] Mike Helton one day, 'Do you want to take your wife and kids and walk the streets a few blocks away from the Hall of Fame in Atlanta?' He said, 'Why?' I said, 'Just try it and you'll see.'"

Well, well, well.........I think I smell a rat!

That one was a little dirty. I think it all depends on what area of downtown you are in. There are some areas I wouldn't want to walk through at night, but I've never felt unsafe at Centennial Olympic PArk at night (in fact, it's one of my favorite places to go.

[Andrea]

There are some areas I wouldn't want to walk through at night, but I've never felt unsafe at Centennial Olympic PArk at night (in fact, it's one of my favorite places to go.

The last time I was there at night was back in December. I was panhandled twice, but hey, this is Atlanta. Things are certainly a lot better than they used to be in that regard. In the old days (70's and 80's) the street people seemed far more aggressive and numerous.

[charlotte_bon_vivant]

ok I know you guys really wanted this too

Outside of this forum, that was never true. Most Atlantans didn't want the HOF there. The bid never had the support of citizens in the same way as Charlotte. I wasn't a supporter of the HOF being in Atlanta either. Nothing against NASCAR fans, but I didn't want to see my hometown associated with it. I would greatly prefer more homes and retail in DT Atlanta. I would prefer to have more walkable streets and restaurants. I'd love for Atlanta to model itself a bit more after San Francisco. It has some of the raw elements there: culture, diversity, progressiveness. If only...

[teshadoh]

Just to summarize some comments I've made all over the cyber world:

* Atlanta didn't need to bear the burden of this responsibility.

* Fairlie-Poplar wasn't a good site location, there would be good sites, but the downtown district wasn't one - despite being beside Centinneal Park. I'm saying this because I love F-P.

* Atlanta's financial package was weak & hastily put together - it showed how truly desperate the city was in winning this.

* The greatest point, especially with the loss of BellSouth, is that ATlanta still is suffering from an erosion of it's civic community. With a number of ego hits, in a city used to "having it's way", I am concerned that Atlanta's image may diminish as the "can do city" image it has developed.

[UrbanAtl]

Congratulations to Charlotte. I love Atlanta but Charlotte truely is family so lets all be happy for her.

[bfermanich]

I'd love for Atlanta to model itself a bit more after San Francisco. It has some of the raw elements there: culture, diversity, progressiveness. If only...

Be careful of what you wish for dude. Sure San Fran has nice beautiful city streets and is walkable and all that. But that certainly is not the ultimate holy grail of city greatness. Its also expensive as hell to live there. It has next to no growth rate. It has a very imposing government system -- progressive, socialist, whatever you want to call it. But I don't see these things as good things, my friend.

[Newnan]

Just to summarize some comments I've made all over the cyber world:

* Atlanta didn't need to bear the burden of this responsibility.

* Fairlie-Poplar wasn't a good site location, there would be good sites, but the downtown district wasn't one - despite being beside Centinneal Park. I'm saying this because I love F-P.

* Atlanta's financial package was weak & hastily put together - it showed how truly desperate the city was in winning this.

* The greatest point, especially with the loss of BellSouth, is that ATlanta still is suffering from an erosion of it's civic community. With a number of ego hits, in a city used to "having it's way", I am concerned that Atlanta's image may diminish as the "can do city" image it has developed.

We're still a can do city. We have a strong spirit and I think everybody is confident that we can rebound from all these disappointments we've suffered. I mean, our city was burned down for oodness sake. if we can rebound from that we can rebound from anything. Besides, I think we're letting the bad overshadow all the good things that are going on here

[ironchapman]

Just to summarize some comments I've made all over the cyber world:

* Atlanta's financial package was weak & hastily put together - it showed how truly desperate the city was in winning this.

Yeah, I agree here. This might reflect not as much how much Atlantans wanted it, but how much the city wanted it just for the sake of having it. I'm not saying it wouldn't or couldn't be successful here, but it was more of an ego thing as opposed to something that the residents felt a deep connection to (like it was in Daytona and Charlotte).

* The greatest point, especially with the loss of BellSouth, is that ATlanta still is suffering from an erosion of it's civic community. With a number of ego hits, in a city used to "having it's way", I am concerned that Atlanta's image may diminish as the "can do city" image it has developed.

I think the recent hits will help mature Atlanta, to be honest. We had seemed to become complacent that some of our standards (BellSouth, Delta, etc.) would forever be with us and never a) get into trouble (like Delta) or b) be bought out (like BellSouth or Georgia-Pacific). Though, to be honest, I don't think that we'll be seeing any companies move out soon to another city because our business climate is so favorable that many cities would have a hard time beating it right now.

Anyways, I think the loss of these companies in the long run will help teach us that we aren't "immortal" and that things can change. Fortunately, dealing with change effectively is something Atlanta seems to have a talent for. I think we'll always have that "we can do it!" ideaology because that is something that has long been engraved into our city's history and mindset.

[Martinman]

I don't think Atlanta's "can do" image or spirit is any danger of fading. This is hardly the first time it's gone after something and not won. The next time something like this comes along, you can count on one city, Atlanta, at least throwing its name into the hat.

One major "can-do" thing Atlanta has going for it is the Beltline which is the largest urban renewal project in the country and will have a far greater impact on the city than anything negative that has happened recently.

[bfermanich]

One major "can-do" thing Atlanta has going for it is the Beltline which is the largest urban renewal project in the country and will have a far greater impact on the city than anything negative that has happened recently.

This may not be relevant to this thread, but something that scares me about the beltline is that it might become too sucessful. I'm talking about a revitalization of the urban core probably will spike housing prices to the point of unaffordability. Businesses may find it too expensive to operate here if we don't have a competitive advantage in terms of affordability with other American cities. Now I understand that this can be a natural consequence of the revitalization of cities, and revitalizing cities is a good thing generally. But I just thought I'd mention this for the sake of argument.

[Newnan]

manhattan seems to be faring well. Also, Atlanta has space. In New York, Manhattan is the premiere place to live and work. Atlanta will always have many more desirable locations outside of the area this beltline will encompass.

[ironchapman]

manhattan seems to be faring well. Also, Atlanta has space. In New York, Manhattan is the premiere place to live and work. Atlanta will always have many more desirable locations outside of the area this beltline will encompass.

I don't know if it makes much difference, but the fact that Manhattan and New York city in general has so much importance to the business and financial world (i.e. Wall Street, the World Trade Center, a major seaport, a major air hub, etc.) might make some companies more willing to pay the price to locate there despite the high taxes.

Besides, I don't think New York City is really a good comparison for this. It's very much a special case in US Cities. Chicago falls in much the same category as New York. Most cities, as they urbanize and densify, usually see tax rates go through the roof (see places like San Francisco, LA, Washington DC, etc.) causing most of their companies to relocate to the suburbs or elsewhere in the nation.

[bfermanich]

Most cities, as they urbanize and densify, usually see tax rates go through the roof (see places like San Francisco, LA, Washington DC, etc.) causing most of their companies to relocate to the suburbs or elsewhere in the nation.

Why does this have to occur? You would think that as cities mature and become more wealthy and sucessful they wouldn't have to burden their citizens as much with high taxes. You would think it would go in the opposite direction, right? More prosperity would allow for lower taxes because... oh wait a minute, yeah I almost forgot. Liberals -- notorious for raising taxes -- populate most of America's urban areas. So this would explain the increase in taxes. Funny thing is, the wealthy business owners and decision makers are the main guys getting the tax hike. So they pack up and move to Bentonville, Arkansas for instance. Smart move if you ask me.

Well seems I answered my own question. Nevermind

[Andrea]

More prosperity would allow for lower taxes because... oh wait a minute, yeah I almost forgot. Liberals -- notorious for raising taxes -- populate most of America's urban areas. So this would explain the increase in taxes.

Just out of curiosity, are the prosperous suburban counties run by conservatives cutting taxes? If so, I'd say they'd make an excellent model for the urban areas.

[bfermanich]

Just out of curiosity, are the prosperous suburban counties run by conservatives cutting taxes? If so, I'd say they'd make an excellent model for the urban areas.

Generally so. But this isn't the only reason for success. I think it helps people want to live in your county. And it gives your citizens more money to spend in your county.

[Andrea]

Generally so. But this isn't the only reason for success. I think it helps people want to live in your county. And it gives your citizens more money to spend in your county.

Do you happen to have any examples of the counties that are cutting taxes?

I think a significant part of the tax problem with areas like the city of Atlanta has to do with issues other than the conservative or liberal bent of its politicians. (Our current president and congress, for example, although ostensibly conservative, have worked to increase the size of government and the level of deficit spending far beyond anything in history).

One of the things affecting the city of Atlanta is that it has to support a very large and aging infrastructure. It also lost big segments of its middle class population during the the mass exodus of the 1960-80 era when the schools were desegregated. It's my understanding that Atlanta's financial support from the state and federal governments is also less than its suburban counties.

Whether those problems will replicate in the older suburban counties like Cobb and DeKalb remains to be seen. Hopefully not, as a number of the factors that pounded the city of Atlanta are either not present or have been modified.

[derrickskugler]

Bfer - Don't bring up politics on this board. Even if you're right (and in this case, you ARE right), you're still wrong.

Most of the mods on Urbanplanet are liberals (the New Orleans board was a giant Bush-bash for months after Katrina, head-lined by the mods as much as the posters, talking NOTHING about urbanity), and even when you can prove your point with facts, you're still wrong.

If you stick to talking about tall buildings and how bad wide roads are, you'll do just fine here. :->

In all seriousness, just about any educated economist will tell you that lower taxes are a hallmark of conservative government and that higher taxes are a hallmark of liberal government. It's one of the biggest reasons why most of suburbia is growing as it is... and why most of suburbia is also conservative. There's just something about Capitalism...

[monsoon]

Bfer - Don't bring up politics on this board. Even if you're right (and in this case, you ARE right), you're still wrong.

Most of the mods on Urbanplanet are liberals (the New Orleans board was a giant Bush-bash for months after Katrina, head-lined by the mods as much as the posters, talking NOTHING about urbanity), and even when you can prove your point with facts, you're still wrong.

If you stick to talking about tall buildings and how bad wide roads are, you'll do just fine here. :->

In all seriousness, just about any educated economist will tell you that lower taxes are a hallmark of conservative government and that higher taxes are a hallmark of liberal government. It's one of the biggest reasons why most of suburbia is growing as it is... and why most of suburbia is also conservative. There's just something about Capitalism...

Well you are making a lot of generalizations that simply are not true. The labels of conservative vs liberal have two different meanings in this country and have been perveted by right wing politics to mean good vs bad which is simply silly. In the USA the application of one of these labels a code word for "does this person support abortion rights and letting people live on welfare?". Those discussions have nothing to do with UrbanPlanet.

The other meaning is does the person support tax cuts, that that is where it gets real murky, because tax cuts are eventually tied to spending which is the real problem with government.

First, just as a reminder, all governments tax people or they simply would not exist. The question isn't taxes, but rather how much does government spend. The tax issue is a red herring to hide the fact that our government, which many claim to be conservative, spends far more money than it is taking in. In other words the problem is being shifted to the future, but people like Bush can crow "we cut your taxes" and sound better than the people they label as "tax & spend" liberals. What is lost in this rhetoric is that "tax & spend" is the purpose of goverment and not the "borrow & spend" which is a far far worse form of fiscal policy. 1/3 of all taxes collected by the federal government today goes to pay interest on the federal debt. And it is getting worse due to the spending policies of our current administration. No economist will say that lower taxes are a hallmark of a conservative government as that doesn't make any sense if not framed in the context of spending. But all economists will tell you that continued deficit spending which is a hallmark of OUR conservative government is dangerous and very bad for the country.

In regards to your comments on the staff here at UrbanPlanet, if you think something is unfair, then you can bring it up with the staff. We are not all the liberals that you make it up to be, and don't label anyone here who criticises Bush as doing something wrong. Honestly every defense that I have seen of Bush on this site has been in the order of making personal attacks on the person delivering the message since there is no defense for most of the criticism being put forth about our administrations policies.

If you want to discuss it further, take it to the coffeehouse.

[monsoon]

Why does this have to occur? You would think that as cities mature and become more wealthy and sucessful they wouldn't have to burden their citizens as much with high taxes. You would think it would go in the opposite direction, right? More prosperity would allow for lower taxes because... oh wait a minute, yeah I almost forgot. Liberals -- notorious for raising taxes -- populate most of America's urban areas. So this would explain the increase in taxes. Funny thing is, the wealthy business owners and decision makers are the main guys getting the tax hike. So they pack up and move to Bentonville, Arkansas for instance. Smart move if you ask me.

Well seems I answered my own question. Nevermind

First if you are going to sling around comments then at least get the comments correct. It's been my experience that people who start throwing around the "liberal" tag on this forum have a lot of complaints, but are short on the facts. For example, while you didn't mention it by name, Walmart did not move to Bentonville Arkansas. It is homegrown from there. I am not aware of any other significant business that has relocated to that city.

Second, the "liberal inspired taxes" as the reason for corporations leaving cities simply isn't true. I don't see any mass corporate exodus from NYC for example and that is about as "liberal" as it comes. If anything NYC continues to grow. Interesting enough, it is the cities in states that are considered "conservative" when it comes to politics where most of the worst sprawl occurs. Remember that in the USA non-Federal taxation is controlled by State government, not local goverment. Local government's can tax, but only with the rights of taxation granted by the states.

[SmellyCat]

I don't know if it makes much difference, but the fact that Manhattan and New York city in general has so much importance to the business and financial world (i.e. Wall Street, the World Trade Center, a major seaport, a major air hub, etc.) might make some companies more willing to pay the price to locate there despite the high taxes.

In a good economy, yes. NYC was still the world financial hub in the 1970s and early 1980s when companies were hightailing out of there so fast, it would make your head spin. During poor economic times, nothing about high rents and taxes is compelling, even to have a prestigious address.

[charlotte_bon_vivant]

If you stick to talking about tall buildings and how bad wide roads are, you'll do just fine here. :->

Isn't that kind of the point of the site? Urban issues and skyscraper discussion? There are plenty of forums to discuss politics, but very few dedicated to urban discussion. I don't mind political discussion, but I don't believe the vast majority visit this site for those topics.

MY apologies for threadjacking....

[bfermanich]

First if you are going to sling around comments then at least get the comments correct. It's been my experience that people who start throwing around the "liberal" tag on this forum have a lot of complaints, but are short on the facts. For example, while you didn't mention it by name, Walmart did not move to Bentonville Arkansas. It is homegrown from there. I am not aware of any other significant business that has relocated to that city.

Second, the "liberal inspired taxes" as the reason for corporations leaving cities simply isn't true. I don't see any mass corporate exodus from NYC for example and that is about as "liberal" as it comes. If anything NYC continues to grow. Interesting enough, it is the cities in states that are considered "conservative" when it comes to politics where most of the worst sprawl occurs. Remember that in the USA non-Federal taxation is controlled by State government, not local goverment. Local government's can tax, but only with the rights of taxation granted by the states.

If you want to talk about liberal inspired high-taxes, lets talk about the STATE of California. California is overwhelmingly liberal. Thats fine with me -- I'm not picking sides. I'm just pointing out "facts". Look at this article from the liberal newspaper otherwise known as the San Francisco Chronicle...

Exodus worries: High taxes and lots of rules prompt some firms to leave state

You can read that if you want to. I don't care. But the "facts" are there. Google "California high taxes exodus" or something like that and you'll see what I mean.

Anyway, I didn't intend to ruin this thread. I saw something someone posted, so I called them out on it. We can rename this thread if you want to, but I think people originally came here to talk about NASCAR. Lets get back to talking about how Atlanta lost the NASCAR bid or something to that effect.