| II. Economic Development |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 1 |
Fortune 500 companies in Fulton; leadership from these companies |
8 |
| 2 |
Hub for economic development |
7 |
| 6 |
Homegrown businesses which are fifty years and older |
2 |
| 9 |
International exposure |
0 |
| 9 |
Funds available for economic development / access to capital |
0 |
| 1 |
Fulton County's economic engine |
6 |
| 1 |
High employment |
5 |
| 3 |
Base level of goods and services |
1 |
| 4 |
Availability of jobs |
0 |
| 0 |
Diverse economy and population |
0 |
| 0 |
Wealthiest county in the state |
0 |
| 3 |
Economic resources |
2 |
| 5 |
Rich County / economic diversity |
0 |
| 3 |
Diversified economy |
0 |
| 3 |
Overall employment opportunities |
0 |
| 3 |
Reasonable cost of living |
0 |
| 3 |
Real estate values |
3 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 5 |
Employment |
1 |
| 5 |
Growth |
1 |
| 6 |
Shannon Mall |
0 |
| 2 |
Not enough businesses - employment opportunities |
0 |
| 5 |
Lack of awareness that we're a major tax base |
1 |
| 6 |
County is big - economic differences |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 6 |
Collaboration to create Research Triangle Park type growth |
1 |
| 7 |
Fulton Industrial District will emerge |
0 |
| 1 |
Viable economic development |
4 |
| 5 |
Government services that promote entreprenurial growth |
0 |
| 5 |
Reduce out-commuting of income |
0 |
| 1 |
Big growth in real estate; residential |
3 |
| 3 |
South Fulton will be affluent and the most desirable place to live |
1 |
| III. Housing |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 4 |
Affordable and accessible residential housing |
4 |
| 5 |
Booming rooftop (increase in construction activity) |
1 |
| 4 |
Styles of homes |
1 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 5 |
Poor jobs/housing balance and mobility issues |
3 |
| 5 |
Limited affordable housing |
3 |
| 6 |
Punitive development fee structure for utilities |
2 |
| 3 |
Too many multifamily developments |
1 |
| 3 |
Affordable housing |
3 |
| 4 |
Quality of home construction |
2 |
| 3 |
Lack of housing price diversity |
1 |
| 4 |
Multifamily housing |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 5 |
Housing / employment balance |
0 |
| 6 |
More urban, dense housing |
0 |
| 2 |
Jobs / housing balance: better and more housing choices |
4 |
| 5 |
Affordable |
0 |
| 3 |
National model of redeveloping public housing (Hope VI) |
1 |
| IV. Natural and Cultural Resources |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 1 |
Different and diverse geography/environment |
8 |
| 3 |
Existing trees, foliage, greenspace, and landscape |
5 |
| 6 |
Land mass - physically large county |
2 |
| 8 |
Chattahoochee River |
1 |
| 9 |
Historic places / rich history |
0 |
| 1 |
The natural environment of the county |
6 |
| 2 |
Diversity of land forms |
3 |
| 3 |
Existing tree canopy |
1 |
| 3 |
Diversity of topography/ geography |
1 |
| 4 |
Historic resources |
0 |
| 4 |
Greenspace |
0 |
| 4 |
Moderate climate |
0 |
| 1 |
Greenspace |
6 |
| 1 |
Beautiful land in South Fulton |
3 |
| 3 |
Wildlife |
2 |
| 4 |
Trees |
1 |
| 4 |
Lakes and streams |
1 |
| 3 |
Natural resources |
0 |
| 3 |
Abundance of trees |
0 |
| 3 |
Clean air |
0 |
| 2 |
Natural landscape |
4 |
| 5 |
Beautiful but underappreciated historic resouces |
1 |
| 1 |
Greenspace |
5 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 6 |
Inadequate open space/green space |
2 |
| 8 |
Chattahoochee River pollution |
0 |
| 8 |
Air quality, water quality, and tree loss |
0 |
| 8 |
Enforcement of Tree Ordinance |
0 |
| 8 |
Diminishing quality of life (natural beauty) |
0 |
| 3 |
Lack of public greenspace / diminishing greenspace in N. Fulton |
3 |
| 4 |
Lack of environmental code enforcement |
2 |
| 5 |
County is physically too large of a geographic area |
1 |
| 5 |
Loss of tree canopy, habitat, and species |
1 |
| 3 |
Maintaining greenspace |
1 |
| 4 |
Fulton County's elongated geographic shape |
0 |
| 4 |
Stream protection |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 5 |
South Fulton preserved as much green space as possible |
2 |
| 2 |
Preservation of rural areas, preservation of greenspace and parks |
6 |
| 4 |
More protected, meaningful greenspace (buildable land protected) |
1 |
| 1 |
Developers preserve natural beauty |
2 |
| V. Community Facilities and Services - General |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 9 |
Good infrastructure |
0 |
| 2 |
No stormwater management problems in South Fulton |
1 |
| 4 |
Land and infrastructure |
1 |
| 5 |
Educational facilities |
0 |
| 6 |
Transportation, arts, schools, and health facilities |
0 |
| 6 |
Regional recreation destination |
0 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 2 |
Infrastructure - concern about ability to meet demands of growth |
8 |
| 4 |
Carrying burden of regional issues and services |
4 |
| 1 |
Poor infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc) |
5 |
| 1 |
Overstressed infrastructure |
3 |
| 6 |
Lack of impact fees (for roads, schools, etc) |
0 |
| 2 |
No impact fees |
5 |
| 4 |
Infrastructure |
2 |
| 1 |
Lack of coordination between services and infrastructure |
1 |
| 6 |
Storm water / pollution |
0 |
| 6 |
Tax burden |
0 |
| 1 |
Quality of life: air, water, and sewer quality deficiencies |
7 |
| 2 |
Disparity in educational facilities and resources |
4 |
| 3 |
Access to Chattahoochee River for recreation |
3 |
| 4 |
Water and sewer rate differences |
2 |
| 4 |
Attention to infrastructure capacity |
2 |
| 5 |
Equal access to public services |
1 |
| 6 |
Crime and safety |
0 |
| 6 |
Services to a transient population |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 3 |
Face economic realities - defray cost through population growth |
2 |
| 3 |
Developers pay fully funded impact fees for infrastructure |
2 |
| 4 |
Catch up with infrastructure |
1 |
| 5 |
Preservation of community and public facilities |
0 |
| 3 |
Infrastructure balanced with growth |
2 |
| 1 |
Better educational facilities: equalize North and South Fulton |
3 |
| 3 |
Eliminate disparity between north and south community services and housing |
1 |
| 3 |
Stronger county |
1 |
| 4 |
One unified community: service delivery |
0 |
| V. Community Facilities & Services -
General Government |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 9 |
Access to government and meaningful public participation |
0 |
| 2 |
Strength and competency of county staff |
3 |
| 4 |
Lower tax base |
0 |
| 4 |
Tax reducing policies and incentives |
0 |
| 1 |
Employees of Fulton County |
5 |
| 3 |
Employment opportunities in Fulton County |
3 |
| 5 |
Public service commitment |
1 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 3 |
Dysfunctional government structure |
5 |
| 6 |
Poor Public Works customer service |
2 |
| 6 |
Perceived differences between North and South Fulton |
2 |
| 6 |
Keeping up with growth and service delivery countywide |
2 |
| 7 |
Consistent service delivery countywide |
1 |
| 8 |
Public perception of poor management; manage image better |
0 |
| 8 |
Balance of tax revenue and service delivery |
0 |
| 3 |
Challenge of managing change with limited resources |
1 |
| 6 |
Lack of accountability |
0 |
| 6 |
Access to decision makers |
0 |
| 2 |
Taxation versus services |
2 |
| 2 |
Government inefficiency |
0 |
| 1 |
Political climate |
4 |
| 4 |
Responsiveness of government |
0 |
| 3 |
Lack of coordination within the County's bureacracy |
2 |
| 5 |
County staff not responsive to new ideas |
1 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 3 |
Services will be consolidated |
6 |
| 4 |
District lines will disappear |
3 |
| 6 |
Growth in regional government; reduction in county government |
1 |
| 7 |
County government diminished with consolidation of services |
0 |
| 3 |
All commissioners at-large |
2 |
| 4 |
Listen to the voice of planning instead of political voices |
1 |
| 5 |
Be a model for the metropolitan Atlanta area |
0 |
| 5 |
Continue to be responsive to all citizens |
0 |
| 2 |
Consolidation of Board of Commissioners and Board of Education |
3 |
| 5 |
Re-circulate county funds |
0 |
| V. Community Facilities & Services -
Recreation Facilities |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 8 |
Good parks and recreation facilities |
1 |
| 4 |
Recreation amenities and facilities |
0 |
| 4 |
Extra-curricular activities for school age children |
0 |
| 3 |
Great parks in South Fulton |
0 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 8 |
Ability to meet recreational needs |
0 |
| 3 |
Challenge of increasing park space |
1 |
| 4 |
Bike trails, recreation services, walking trails, and sidewalks |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 3 |
Recreation facilities, sidewalks, and paths |
2 |
| 4 |
Improved preservation |
0 |
| 4 |
Improved stream restoration |
0 |
| 5 |
Greenway along the Chattahoochee River |
1 |
| V. Community Facilities & Services -
Educational Facilities |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 3 |
Outstanding higher education |
5 |
| 8 |
Strong schools with some gaps |
1 |
| 1 |
Good schools |
5 |
| 4 |
Schools |
0 |
| 4 |
Schools strong because of public involvement |
0 |
| 5 |
Colleges and universities |
1 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 1 |
Achievement gap (north / south); drop out rate; not enough schools in South Fulton |
13 |
| 7 |
Insufficient number of schools in South Fulton |
1 |
| 8 |
No high technology educational centers in South Fulton |
0 |
| 6 |
Deficient school construction planning |
0 |
| 1 |
Schools |
9 |
| 1 |
South Fulton schools |
1 |
| 1 |
More accountability for school board in South Fulton |
1 |
| 2 |
Poor quality of education |
0 |
| 2 |
School construction is slow to respond to new development |
0 |
| 5 |
Disparity in the educational system between North and South Fulton |
1 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 1 |
Excellent schools in both parts of the County |
2 |
| 5 |
Cooperation with public schools and universities |
1 |
| VI. Land Use |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 3 |
Potential for growth (amount of undeveloped land) |
5 |
| 8 |
Urban and rural areas |
1 |
| 3 |
Demonstrated implementation of innovative planning methods |
1 |
| 4 |
Land planning exists |
0 |
| 4 |
Urban life exists |
0 |
| 3 |
Plenty of land |
2 |
| 4 |
Land availability |
1 |
| 5 |
Rural and urban |
0 |
| 3 |
Urban and rural character |
1 |
| 2 |
Diversity of industry, working, and living environment |
4 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 2 |
Sprawling development, unplanned growth, and long commute times |
8 |
| 4 |
Disagreement between developers and community residents |
4 |
| 6 |
Lack of proactive incentives for developers to do the right thing |
2 |
| 6 |
Lack of sustainable growth plan |
2 |
| 6 |
Different viewpoints between residents: property as a finacial asset to sell
versus a place to live |
2 |
| 7 |
Segregated communities by income (exclusive and poverty) |
1 |
| 1 |
Not producing a clear plan and sticking to it |
3 |
| 1 |
Allowing micromanaged development without planning for the big picture |
3 |
| 4 |
Sprawl (overdevelopment and lack of monitoring) |
2 |
| 2 |
Balancing the rights of developers with rights of citizens |
2 |
| 4 |
Balance of urban and rural environments |
0 |
| 2 |
Insufficient number of retail establishments in South Fulton |
2 |
| 2 |
Unbridled growth |
2 |
| 5 |
Managing development |
1 |
| 1 |
Deficient coordination in planning development |
1 |
| 1 |
Runaway development |
1 |
| 6 |
Proper land use |
0 |
| 6 |
Integration of development |
0 |
| 6 |
Developer, builder, and community involvement |
0 |
| 3 |
Sprawling development pattern |
1 |
| 1 |
Lack of acceptance of different types of development patterns |
9 |
| 5 |
Farmland preservation |
1 |
| 6 |
Divide between business and homeowner communities; residents are left out of development decisions |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 2 |
More brown field and infill development |
9 |
| 3 |
South Fulton will be planned carefully, avoid problems of North Fulton,
have easy access to resources |
6 |
| 4 |
Growth will be decentralized and more vertical |
4 |
| 6 |
County will proactively plan resulting in community pride |
2 |
| 6 |
Shift in development areas and issues |
1 |
| 1 |
Managed, sustainable growth, including appropriate areas for high and low density |
6 |
| 3 |
Subdividing the county into smaller planning areas (more than four planning areas) |
2 |
| 4 |
Planned density defined |
1 |
| 4 |
Preserve agricultural land and zoning district |
1 |
| 4 |
Maintain large lot homes (estate zoning) |
1 |
| 4 |
More community based planning projects such as LCI projects |
1 |
| 5 |
Mathematic equation for sustainable growth (growth limits) |
0 |
| 5 |
Slow growth |
0 |
| 5 |
Generally adopted plan |
0 |
| 0 |
Denser developments |
0 |
| 0 |
Dying city center with rich suburbs |
0 |
| 1 |
Maintain the rural / urban character |
6 |
| 2 |
Denser development along the parkway |
4 |
| 2 |
Balancing school growth with development |
3 |
| 2 |
Smart growth zones |
3 |
| 4 |
Managed growth along South Fulton Parkway |
2 |
| 5 |
Overbuilding |
1 |
| 5 |
Preserve greenspace and the rural character |
1 |
| 5 |
Be more like Peachtree City with low, short signs |
1 |
| 5 |
Without change, will be like City of Atlanta |
1 |
| 2 |
More redevelopment and infill |
1 |
| 3 |
South Fulton developed with vision not developer driven or piecemeal |
0 |
| 1 |
More smart growth |
4 |
| 3 |
Visible smart growth in the region |
1 |
| 4 |
Growth boundaries |
0 |
| 1 |
Well planned |
5 |
| 4 |
Rebirth of older commercial strips that includes residential areas |
2 |
| 4 |
Unique communities and cities |
2 |
| 5 |
World class design in architecture and landscape |
1 |
| 2 |
Highly developed like North Fulton |
2 |
| 2 |
Development in West End and Northwest Fulton |
2 |
| 3 |
Model of innovation, compatible uses, and live, work, and play policies that work for people |
1 |
| VII. Intergovernmental Coordination |
| Rank |
Weaknesses / Challenges |
Number of Votes |
| 4 |
Jurisdictional warfare (city versus county) |
4 |
| 5 |
No interaction with other governments on code enforcement |
3 |
| 7 |
Intergovernmental coordination |
1 |
| 2 |
Lack of intergovernmental coordination |
4 |
| 4 |
Political infighting (Local, state, and region) |
2 |
| 2 |
Lack of intergovernmental cooperation |
2 |
| 6 |
Influence exhibited by Atlanta Regional Commission |
0 |
| 2 |
Political structure between county and municipalities |
2 |
| 3 |
Lack of regional cooperation |
2 |
| 4 |
Poor coordination of services between City of Atlanta and Fulton County |
2 |
| 5 |
Updating utility lines and poles |
1 |
| Rank |
20 Year Vision |
Number of Votes |
| 4 |
Improved intergovernmental relations, particularly with City of Atlanta |
4 |
| 5 |
County leadership could maintain influence in the region if plan is done well |
3 |
| 6 |
No unincorporated areas north of the Chattahoochee River |
1 |
| 6 |
No Unincorporated areas north of the City of Atlanta |
1 |
| 3 |
Consolidated governments |
2 |
| 6 |
Only unincorporated area in Fulton County |
0 |
| 3 |
Consolidation of services |
1 |
| 4 |
Less unincorporated areas |
2 |
| 2 |
Two counties |
2 |
| VIII. Transportation |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 5 |
Present access to Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport |
3 |
| 5 |
Existing transit system |
3 |
| 9 |
Transportation infrastructure |
0 |
| 4 |
Transportation: base infrastructure (MARTA - HOV lanes) |
0 |
| 1 |
Accessibility (downtown Atlanta, Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, etc) |
6 |
| 2 |
South Fulton's proximity to Hartsfield-Jackson Airport |
1 |
| 3 |
Close proximity to transportation arteries |
0 |
| 3 |
Good traffic flow in South Fulton |
0 |
| 3 |
Good access to MARTA |
0 |
| 3 |
South Fulton's proximity to Atlanta |
0 |
|   |
Weaknesses/Challenges |
  |
| 3 |
Inadequate transportation resources |
5 |
| 5 |
Traffic congestion and air quality |
3 |
| 6 |
Poor connectivity (sidewalks and communities) |
2 |
| 8 |
Inadequate street linkage |
0 |
| 1 |
Traffic congestion |
3 |
| 4 |
Inadequate public transportation, not pedestrian friendly, regional system needed |
2 |
| 4 |
Poor coordination between land use and transportation |
2 |
| 5 |
High commuter traffic |
1 |
| 5 |
Pedestrian access to schools |
1 |
| 5 |
Lack of pedestrian network |
1 |
| 0 |
Lack of transportation options |
0 |
| 1 |
Roads |
9 |
| 3 |
Mass transit |
1 |
| 6 |
Insufficient number of sidewalks |
0 |
| 6 |
Insufficient lighting |
0 |
| 2 |
Poor pedestrian facilities and access |
0 |
| 4 |
Traffic |
0 |
| 4 |
Transit system |
0 |
| 5 |
Fear of mass transit - social status |
1 |
| 5 |
Deficient transportation network and lack of choices |
1 |
| 5 |
Traffic |
1 |
| 2 |
Deficient number of sidewalks |
4 |
| 3 |
Disparity in repairing bridges and infrastructure |
3 |
| 4 |
Roads |
2 |
| 6 |
Deficient signalization |
0 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 1 |
Regional transportation system |
16 |
| 7 |
Fulton County will be more pedestrian friendly |
3 |
| 6 |
Integrated bus-rail system |
1 |
| 6 |
Fulton County Airport expanded |
1 |
| 1 |
Multiple means of transportation; transportation options |
7 |
| 2 |
Improved pedestrian networks |
3 |
| 3 |
Less congested roads |
2 |
| 3 |
Bike paths |
2 |
| 4 |
Modernize Fulton County Airport |
1 |
| 4 |
Alternative transportation |
1 |
| 5 |
Reuse of abandoned rail lines - new transportation system |
0 |
| 5 |
Interconnectivity |
0 |
| 2 |
Mass transit and commuter rail |
3 |
| 3 |
Interconnected uses and communities |
3 |
| 4 |
Improved mobility |
1 |
| 3 |
Friendly roadways |
0 |
| 3 |
Eliminate impediments to mobility |
0 |
| 2 |
Multiple modes of transportation available |
2 |
| 4 |
Clean transportation (gasoline) |
0 |
| 4 |
Promote walkability |
0 |
| 4 |
Improved and enhanced connectivity |
0 |
| 3 |
More efficient mass transit system |
3 |
| 3 |
Camp Creek Parkway will be a major transit corridor |
1 |
| 4 |
Cooperation between Fulton and Cobb County in the redevelopment of Fulton County Airport |
0 |
| Other |
| Rank |
Strengths |
Number of Votes |
| 4 |
Good core communities |
4 |
| 5 |
Central location in state and region |
3 |
| 6 |
High quality of life |
2 |
| 9 |
Highly educated and informed public |
0 |
| 3 |
Diversity, quality of life, and lifestyles including low density areas |
1 |
| 4 |
Strong community groups |
0 |
| 2 |
Proximity to central services (Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, downtown, etc) |
3 |
| 3 |
Potential |
2 |
| 3 |
Strong homeowner associations |
0 |
| 1 |
Quality of life |
3 |
| 2 |
Community involvement and participation |
2 |
| 5 |
Community leadership |
1 |
| 5 |
Good downtown (Atlanta), central area |
1 |
| 6 |
Strong city core |
0 |
| 4 |
Opportunity |
2 |
| 6 |
Quality of life |
0 |
|   |
Weaknesses / Challenges |
  |
| 4 |
NIMBYism - Not In My Back Yard attitude |
2 |
| 1 |
Need better communication and education for communities |
1 |
| 4 |
No cooperation with community |
0 |
| 2 |
Lack of community empowerment |
0 |
| 2 |
Citizens have a narrow focus |
3 |
| 3 |
Repeating our mistakes |
3 |
| 5 |
Notification process concerning public meetings |
1 |
|   |
20 Year Vision |
  |
| 6 |
Model for the Southeast |
0 |