U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:07 AM
 
864 posts, read 400,304 times
Reputation: 355

Advertisements

I was never surveyed and I moved here last year around this time. I can see how it can be off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Savannah GA
8,352 posts, read 6,680,883 times
Reputation: 5251
What?! Sandy Springs was NEVER "part" of the city of Atlanta. There was "no split," Ignorance is bliss isn't it DTL? Go stick your head back in the sand .... you clearly haven't a clue about this stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Historic Downtown, Jersey City, NJ
327 posts, read 436,041 times
Reputation: 235
I'm sure that there are people that weren't counted however it's all relative. I'm sure the same issue occurred across the country so no ones stats are 100% accurate. As a native though I am a little disappointed as you always like to see your hometown grow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:37 AM
 
2,831 posts, read 2,481,137 times
Reputation: 1249
After 18 hours, still in disbelief that Atlanta's growth was so low.

I wonder if a decent way of attacking the data would be to wait until tracts are released and easily searchable, then look at one particular tract with large losses and attempt to tally the number of abandoned structures. Aerial photography could help, as there are great records of Atlanta in the year 2000 via google earth. I'm thinking this will probably be a somewhat poor, inner city tract (maybe an area like Polar Rock or Capitol View Manor?).

If you can demonstrate the following about a census tract, you'd be in pretty good shape for a challenge:

1) The demographics of the tract did not change in a singificant way
2) The percentage of residential structures in the tract that appear abandoned does not support the decrease in population (for example, 10% of structures being abandoned, but the census showing a 25% population decrease)
3) The total number of residential structures has increased/not decreased

Then the only plausible way the population could have decreased would be average household size, which would be surprising without a substantial demographic shift.

I spend time ALL over the city, and I can tell you firsthand that just about all areas are as bustling as ever. I can still be hell finding a parking spot at the Cleveland Avenue Kroger, and that's just the type of neighborhood that will probably show a decline.

After all, richer areas like Buckhead just HAD to have gained population. There's a McMansion on every formerly unbuildable triangular scrap of land these days.

I really wonder if aerial photography could be used to disprove some of these results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:42 AM
 
Location: ITP
2,133 posts, read 4,053,659 times
Reputation: 1284
Everyone on here doesn't realize the impact that the HOPE VI program has had on the city's population. For those of you unfamiliar, HOPE VI was a HUD program that provided grants to housing authorities across the nation to redevelop public housing projects - many of which had been plagued by blight, crime, and poor living conditions of decades - into mixed income communities. The redevelopment of Techwood Homes into the Olympic Village for the 1996 Summer Games, and then into Centennial Place, was one of the first HOPE VI projects in the country and received rave reviews from the Clinton administration. Encouraged by all of the acclaim generated from both government and stakeholders in the private sector, the Atlanta Housing Authority aggressively pursued similar plans for the rest of their communities.

Despite the program's best intentions, a lot of the original residents in many of these communities were not offered the chance to return after they had been redeveloped. Yes - there were bad apples that made life hard for everybody, but please remember that the majority of these folks were low-income families that relied on the benefits of being in close proximity to the metro area's employment centers.

Additionally many of the city's new residents were young professionals - many of whom were either single or married with no children - that averaged smaller houshold sizes than many of the more established residents.

The housing authority made a lot of progress in closing down a lot of their communties, but the real estate market crash hit before many of these communities could be rebuilt; thus leaving large tracts of vacant land in the middle of the city.

It is important to recognize that these public housing communities were not small by any means, but rather significantly large as exemplified by the fact that they were the home for tens of thousands of city residents all together. Just to give you an idea of the number of public housing communities that have been redeveloped since 2000, here are some of them off the top of my head:
  • Bowen Homes
  • Bankhead Courts
  • Perry Homes
  • Capitol Homes
  • Grady Homes
  • McDaniel-Glenn
  • Carver Homes
  • Thomasville Heights

Now mind you, there have also been many privately-owned low-income apartment communities that have also been shuttered with plans for redevelopent. Also, we shouldn't forget the fact that many residents in Vine City were forced to relocate after the flooding that occurred there several years ago.

So yes - there has definitely been a rapid influx of new residents in the city; I mean there would have to be for the city to still record a positive net gain in population despite all of these residents relocating. However we shouldn't forget the fact that the makeup of Atlanta in 2000 has been drastically altered into the Atlanta of today. Even more, we should also make sure that local and state governments take a more proactive stance in creating more opportunities for the development of workforce/affordable housing, as well as improving transit connections to the suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 08:47 AM
 
Location: ITP - City of Atlanta Proper
6,555 posts, read 6,872,876 times
Reputation: 3715
Quote:
Originally Posted by testa50 View Post
After 18 hours, still in disbelief that Atlanta's growth was so low.

I wonder if a decent way of attacking the data would be to wait until tracts are released and easily searchable, then look at one particular tract with large losses and attempt to tally the number of abandoned structures. Aerial photography could help, as there are great records of Atlanta in the year 2000 via google earth. I'm thinking this will probably be a somewhat poor, inner city tract (maybe an area like Polar Rock or Capitol View Manor?).

If you can demonstrate the following about a census tract, you'd be in pretty good shape for a challenge:

1) The demographics of the tract did not change in a singificant way
2) The percentage of residential structures in the tract that appear abandoned does not support the decrease in population (for example, 10% of structures being abandoned, but the census showing a 25% population decrease)
3) The total number of residential structures has increased/not decreased

Then the only plausible way the population could have decreased would be average household size, which would be surprising without a substantial demographic shift.

I spend time ALL over the city, and I can tell you firsthand that just about all areas are as bustling as ever. I can still be hell finding a parking spot at the Cleveland Avenue Kroger, and that's just the type of neighborhood that will probably show a decline.

After all, richer areas like Buckhead just HAD to have gained population. There's a McMansion on every formerly unbuildable triangular scrap of land these days.

I really wonder if aerial photography could be used to disprove some of these results.
Yeah, looking at Census tract data is going to be real key here to see where the discrepancy lies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Arlington, Va
2,096 posts, read 1,991,150 times
Reputation: 1889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsboy View Post
What?! Sandy Springs was NEVER "part" of the city of Atlanta. There was "no split," Ignorance is bliss isn't it DTL? Go stick your head back in the sand .... you clearly haven't a clue about this stuff.
What's with the attitude? I was wrong. Sue me. I had thought that Sandy Springs was actually a part of Atlanta. There was such an uproar when they became incorporated and I recalled it as occuring within the city of Atlanta when it was within the Fulton County govt.

Still though, didn't some of the people who lived there and in Dunwoody have Atlanta addresses?

What is your explanation for the discrepancy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 10:43 AM
 
262 posts, read 481,131 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTL3000 View Post
Still though, didn't some of the people who lived there and in Dunwoody have Atlanta addresses?
A Sandy Springs locaton's USPS mailing address can say Atlanta, and I think some Sandy Springs companies still use Atlanta for mailing address.

That is different than the issue of the boundaries of the city of Atlanta (which did not change).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
969 posts, read 1,080,613 times
Reputation: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTL3000 View Post
What's with the attitude? I was wrong. Sue me. I had thought that Sandy Springs was actually a part of Atlanta. There was such an uproar when they became incorporated and I recalled it as occuring within the city of Atlanta when it was within the Fulton County govt.

Still though, didn't some of the people who lived there and in Dunwoody have Atlanta addresses?

What is your explanation for the discrepancy?
I think because Sandy Springs and Dunwoody were unincorporated, for mailing purposes they use the next biggest city/town for your address even if you are not technically in that city/town. So it was for mailing purposes and not for census info, if that helps.

I honestly do not understand why there is such a huge difference in the estimates and the actual 2010 census other than a lot of people didn't receive their census forms or they didn't turn them in. Looking at the city today, it is very hard to imagine only a 3000-4000 person increase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
7,732 posts, read 7,392,189 times
Reputation: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTL3000 View Post
Still though, didn't some of the people who lived there and in Dunwoody have Atlanta addresses?

What is your explanation for the discrepancy?
I live in unicorporated DeKalb, and our official mailing address is Atlanta.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top