For the

past week, I have been consumed by the news coverage

regarding the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority

and their grab for dominion over local governments and

their land use plans.

I've spoken

with several county commissioners, heard from citizens on

both sides of the issue, and found some fascinating

commentary on the Internet. This whole notion of new

urbanism, in-filling growth and development to counter

urban sprawl, would have been a great topic for my

freshman philosophy class in college. It was there that I

got my first taste of reason and debate.

My

professor called the class "fetal logic,"

because it covered all the basics of how to make

supported arguments. For me, it was an introduction to

the thread that runs through me. (Just ask my husband,

who thinks I could argue the stripes off a zebra.) This

new urbanism growth concept is an easy mark for those who

like debate. It is chock full of false claims and faulty

logic, and is a "bad moon rising" on our

horizon.

First, let

me say I like the Peachtree City concept of village

development, where each little area has a grocery store,

a school, some churches, a few shops, a few restaurants,

pretty green belts, nature trails, play areas, and lots

of pleasing subdivisions. I even like the idea of the

Walt Banks/Hwy. 54 plan for mixed use development.

If I were a

younger person or an "empty nester," I would

live in a loft over an aesthetically pleasing row of

sidewalk shops, too.

That is NOT

what GRTA is talking about when they advocate higher

density development. We may argue over one house versus

four houses on an acre of land. GRTA could conceivably

demand 10 houses per acre, or more, and our failure to

comply can mean that OUR tax dollars will be withheld

from us and that every other development plan that we

submit could be denied.

New

urbanism as a growth concept is not something you apply

after the sprawl has occurred. The concept has

questionable merit even when it is preemptively applied,

according to critics of the Portland, Ore. plan.

In-filling sprawl with higher density development and

public transit to prevent further sprawl and pollution is

a preposterous plan.

It may be

nice for Atlanta if people in the suburbs start riding

trains to work instead of cars. I would ride the train to

commute IF it was safe and efficient in both time and

cost. But what about residents here who choose local jobs

with less pay in exchange for a higher quality of life

who suddenly find themselves dealing with Atlanta-like

traffic conditions in their own backyards? We may get the

federal money for roads, but we'll have a federal

headache to boot.

One of the

first things people will likely do, especially those who

do not have school-aged children, is move a little

farther out to get back that quiet, country setting they

lost, sprawling "sprawl" even wider. Also false

is the notion that people will walk, ride bikes, or in

our case, ride golf carts to the train station and nearby

stores. When is the last time you saw someone hauling

plywood or PVC pipe from their local Home Depot in a bike

basket or on a golf cart?

How would

you like to take three young children grocery shopping on

foot as a rule rather than the exception? How would you

like to pay even more for retail items because congestion

and planning has narrowed the scope of the market for

retailers? The American "it's the economy,

stupid" culture is not ready for the sweeping change

in daily living that is necessary to cast off the

automobile, no matter how noble the idea may be.

This is

Atlanta, not Atlantis.

The fact

that many people seem to believe that it is the

government's role to decide all of this for us is the

biggest fallacy of all. Wendell Cox, in "The

Heritage Foundation Backgrounder," called the

president's new sprawl initiative "a program in

search of a problem."

We used to

be a nation who headed off social problems with a sound

moral foundation. Then we became a nation who sought

"program" solutions to deal with social

problems which emerged when we lost that foundation. Now

we are a nation with a ruling elite who have pre-ordained

the solutions, and need only to "create" the

suitable problems to fit their socialist agenda.

Make no

mistake - this "new sprawl initiative"

wears a "Made in Washington" label. Just like

the Education Reform Act, these are federal cookie-cutter

designs being implemented piecemeal in governors' offices

all over the country though the systematic creation of

appointed superagencies.

These are

NOT your grandma's cookies. We are allowing our

representative system of government to be dismantled road

fight it.

Your

comments are welcome: [email protected]