What's So Great About Density? (Atlanta, Decatur: apartments, neighborhood, to live in)

[ATLTJL]

However, the city of Atlanta ITSELF is not nearly as dense as it should be and that transit needs to extend past the inner suburbs or as we like to call it, 'in the perimeter'

How will extending transit past the inner suburbs help Atlanta achieve higher density?

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

The fact that you can find strip malls < 1 mile outside of Downtown/Midtown is pathetic to me for a metro of it's size. I think it's even pathetic for LA that just half a mile away from downtown LA, you can find a strip mall.

So much hate for strip malls. No, they are not pretty but they are awfully convenient when you just want to run in and pick up a loaf of bread or drop off your dry cleaning or maybe grab a brewski with your friends.

[Lady's Man]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

All I'm saying is Atlanta needs more options as far as transportation and it needs a better urban core. I've said over and over again that density does not need to go out towards the outer suburbs. They are suburbs for a reason.

However, the city of Atlanta ITSELF is not nearly as dense as it should be and that transit needs to extend past the inner suburbs or as we like to call it, 'in the perimeter'.

The fact that you can find strip malls < 1 mile outside of Downtown/Midtown is pathetic to me for a metro of it's size. I think it's even pathetic for LA that just half a mile away from downtown LA, you can find a strip mall.

They should have planned Atlanta better.

I disagree. Plenty of people would love to live in a dense suburb, where you can get out and walk to stores, resturants, bus stops, etc., and still have your own personal space. In almost all atlanta suburbs, you need a car to get pretty much everywhere. Personally, I'm not sure why anyone finds that appealing.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

How will extending transit past the inner suburbs help Atlanta achieve higher density?

I didn't say it would, but it would help with making the core more accessible to people who either don't have a car or don't want to drive a car.

[athensvaasi]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Time and time again on these threads I see posters going on and on about density, and frankly I'm confused. Are we advocating density for density's sake, or is there some inherent value in density onto itself? Posters keep referring to other large cities that are totally unlike Atlanta in that they boomed in a different era or there are geographic boundaries. I mean, y'all know I'm no fan of Atlanta. One of my biggest problems with this city is that are are entirely too many people. The only time I really like it here is during holidays when what seems like half the population evacuates! So, to me the idea of all these people packed in on top of each other all but gives me panic attacks. So again, why density? Why is it so desirable? Make your pitch.

Allows biking or walking to amenities and work.
Allows business to thrive, as there is a ton of potential customers in a reasonable distance
If done right, more social interaction
If done right, more secure (other cities may be better examples than Atlanta)
Govt can provide proper amenities (eg. you complained about dark roads in a previous post. In a spread out metro, not possible to keep areas well lit)

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

How will extending transit past the inner suburbs help Atlanta achieve higher density?

It will achieve it in two important ways. (This is also a partial response to Ant's comment about density not needing to be in the suburbs)

1) It adds access to the core (midtown/downtown). The highway/road system can only reasonably deliver so many people (cars) to the core for work. We can do expensive improvements and add -some- capacity, but there are finite limits. This one reason why jobs are moving to the suburbs, but also a reason -some- jobs pass us over and consider other smaller sunbelt cities...like Charlotte. The further out transit goes.... the more workers can be delivered to the core. It adds a job/retail density. The reason we should care about this is we want an area that most people in the metro area can easily access. This helps attract more high paying jobs, which makes our economy and our personal property values (and job chances) better. Of course... for these purposes I'm a big fan of commuter rail. Suburban job centers are nice. I fully support them, but they have limited access. The whole metro area can't reach them easily, so when a new company consider relocating there... they only look at potential employee pools within 30-45 minutes rush hour access.

2) suburban density. Let me be clear... I don't want all suburban areas to be dense. I actually want dense nodes that are attractive, good for 20-somethings, single life, job centers, and help boost property values for nearby low-density single family homes (ie. home values in sandy springs are through the roof with access to jobs in the Perimeter area, Cumberland/Vinings, etc..). I mentioned earlier how Gwinnett could be a place that hosts more jobs and be a small dense district, rather than just an aging retail area. If it has a transit station... two things happen: a) it's employment shed is no longer just Gwinnett... It is anywhere with easy access to MARTA. It can share the same employee resources downtown/midtown does. b) Younger, singles like me will find living in a condo there more appealing with easy access to midtown/downtown (of course transit is everything; aesthetics of the community are more important). This is starting to happen slowly in Chamblee with their mid-city loft/condo district.

Now to answer Ant... suburban density... in nodes is important for several reasons... It can help boost property values for people out here, but it also creates regional employment nodes. I want to have a transit-accessible central employment location (traditional downtown) as much as possible. It is the most attractive area to potential employers that want all the employment talent possible, but we still want jobs to be closer to people as much as possible. It is part of the answer to traffic problems. We bring people to jobs, but also jobs out to people. If people in suburban areas can access jobs locally... they aren't clogging up the freeways. As example, there is another thread right now with someone seeking advice on nice places to live to commute to... the Gwinnett Place Mall area. Most people want single family homes and decent size yards without huge commutes. This can be obtainable in a multi-nodal city, even more so if all nodes are connected through a transit backbone.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Nope, still a young guy. I advocate letting the free market work. Comparing Atlanta and the way it has formed to other more established cities is ridiculous. Atlanta has developed the way it has for several reasons that differ than the way older cities developed. It is what it is. It isn't wrong. I don't sit around whining about how backwards the city is. The free market and the decisions of millions of people built the city the way it is. The city is infilling which is great for those that want to live there. Developers are building more medium density infill projects and people are moving back to the city. Why did this happen? The people (the market) wanted it and a profit opportunity existed for developers. Will this continue? Likely. Will we ever be like Chicago or other cities that you get wet dreams over? Probably not. That doesn't mean Atlanta isn't a great city that has a ton to offer. You really put an absurd about of value on the density of the city. The slums of Sao Paolo are pretty dense. Nice place, right? Look at the whole picture and open your mind son.

The rest of your post is whatever. But seriously...enough with the "son" posts. I f-ing hate when people say that crap.

I think Atlanta is moving in the correct direction right now. A lot of single family areas in town, with several higher-density projects filling in. Hopefully, they keep that development smart. I don't live in NYC (even though that is the mecca for my career choice) because that is far TOO dense for me. I think a few more medium-density buildings with lots of fun bars and restaurants (and I guess osme shops for those shopping types...not me) all within walking distance of each other is great thing. I hope the Beltline project will help spur this type of idea. I see the Eastside trail area becoming very hot soon. I wish I had gotten in when the timing was right. I'm just not sure I could find a four-bedroom condo that would be awesome for bringing up children in.

[Staysean23]

Originally Posted by bobkovacs

i can show you strip malls only a few blocks outside the holland tunnel in jersey city, so they're about 1/2 a mile outside from manhattan- what does that have to do with anything?

you are so right lol.. I have even seen a strip mall in brooklyn

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

The rest of your post is whatever. But seriously...enough with the "son" posts. I f-ing hate when people say that crap.

Calm down champ, nothing to get worked up over.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

It will achieve it in two important ways. (This is also a partial response to Ant's comment about density not needing to be in the suburbs)

1) It adds access to the core (midtown/downtown). The highway/road system can only reasonably deliver so many people (cars) to the core for work. We can do expensive improvements and add -some- capacity, but there are finite limits. This one reason why jobs are moving to the suburbs, but also a reason -some- jobs pass us over and consider other smaller sunbelt cities...like Charlotte. The further out transit goes.... the more workers can be delivered to the core. It adds a job/retail density. The reason we should care about this is we want an area that most people in the metro area can easily access. This helps attract more high paying jobs, which makes our economy and our personal property values (and job chances) better. Of course... for these purposes I'm a big fan of commuter rail. Suburban job centers are nice. I fully support them, but they have limited access. The whole metro area can't reach them easily, so when a new company consider relocating there... they only look at potential employee pools within 30-45 minutes rush hour access.

2) suburban density. Let me be clear... I don't want all suburban areas to be dense. I actually want dense nodes that are attractive, good for 20-somethings, single life, job centers, and help boost property values for nearby low-density single family homes (ie. home values in sandy springs are through the roof with access to jobs in the Perimeter area, Cumberland/Vinings, etc..). I mentioned earlier how Gwinnett could be a place that hosts more jobs and be a small dense district, rather than just an aging retail area. If it has a transit station... two things happen: a) it's employment shed is no longer just Gwinnett... It is anywhere with easy access to MARTA. It can share the same employee resources downtown/midtown does. b) Younger, singles like me will find living in a condo there more appealing with easy access to midtown/downtown (of course transit is everything; aesthetics of the community are more important). This is starting to happen slowly in Chamblee with their mid-city loft/condo district.

Now to answer Ant... suburban density... in nodes is important for several reasons... It can help boost property values for people out here, but it also creates regional employment nodes. I want to have a transit-accessible central employment location (traditional downtown) as much as possible. It is the most attractive area to potential employers that want all the employment talent possible, but we still want jobs to be closer to people as much as possible. It is part of the answer to traffic problems. We bring people to jobs, but also jobs out to people. If people in suburban areas can access jobs locally... they aren't clogging up the freeways. As example, there is another thread right now with someone seeking advice on nice places to live to commute to... the Gwinnett Place Mall area. Most people want single family homes and decent size yards without huge commutes. This can be obtainable in a multi-nodal city, even more so if all nodes are connected through a transit backbone.

I'd rather have a hyper-dense urban core then dense suburbs. Atlanta should focus on Downtown and Midtown and 1 mile outside of this similar to Chicago which has an extremely dense core and sparse suburbs outside of this core.