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 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-12-2014, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,458 posts, read 7,257,556 times
Reputation: 4205

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Single family neighborhoods isn't the issue, Most American major cities are again from New Orleans to Cleveland are single family homes, Even Chicago and Detroit is keyword dominated by single family homes.... Very few American cities are dominated by Multi units......... the issue vacancies and gaps.

Alot of the Old Fourth Ward, Grant Park, Cabbagetown, Reynoldstown, Summerhill, Pittsburgh, Mechanicsville, Bankhead, Vine City, English Avenue and etc have been razed. These neighborhoods lots are similar or smaller than Virginia-Highland. Virginia-Highland density is over those neighborhoods because Virginia-Highland has less empty lots and low vacancy.


But even so again Atlanta could gain 100,000 of people with out even touching leafy neighborhoods. I can't stress enough about Brownfield areas, Atlanta has enough to make dozens of new neighborhoods. This is part of the motivation be hide the Beltline. Then Downtown, Midtown, and West Midtown has a significant amount of open areas for development. I just repeated partly what you said the red the difference is your making it seem what we just said is a little area.

Most major cities have a mix that's your mix, lower vacancies and gaps in single family neigbhorhoods, and redevelop the significant amount brownfield space for multi units. Not try to complain about wanting to change up single family neighborhood and put multi family units and etc... If you did that in New Orleans, Cleveland, Chicago and etc those neighborhood leaders would complain about too, Also I hope you understand neighborhoods leaders are involved with the Beltline,

technically speaking this is between neighborhoods... Sub area 2

http://beltlineorg.wpengine.netdna-c...a-02-Chart.jpg
Sub area 1 &2



Also at this point we shouldn't be talking about limits at all, Atlanta has too much available land. Land to redevelop, empty plots, and vacancies to fill. I doubt even by 2050 there would be land availability issues in the core.
No there isn't that much space even in that very pictures you're showing. Most of the land isn't changed and taken up by long density SFH dwellings that are not changing in zoning or densifying.

The rendering you show... IS EXACTLY what I have said. They are redeveloping the brownfield space on older commercial and industrial properties and not the SFH around it. Most of the land is not open to densifying and there are limits to the zoning on those brownfield sites. This means there is a limit to what growth can and will occur in the future without changes from the zoning and mindset of Atlanta today.

Hince my guess of a 500,000 increase.

There are real limits.

And no I will not let you get away with comparing ATL and Chicago. The dwellings in Chicago, even SFH dwellings are much much more packed together and much more denser residential units dominate the neighborhoods. In Atlanta that is not the case. The difference is significant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-12-2014, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,458 posts, read 7,257,556 times
Reputation: 4205
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingImport View Post
Am I missing something? Ronald Reagan Parkway is entirely within Gwinnett County... and you're saying Forsyth passed a bond referendum...
They are currently building a road that parallels GA 400 very similar to how Satellite Blvd was built called Ronald Reagan Blvd.

They could be trying to make traffic reports more confusing in the future. :/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 02:59 PM
 
Location: Metro Atlanta & Savannah, GA - Corpus Christi, TX
4,346 posts, read 6,929,515 times
Reputation: 2040
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
They are currently building a road that parallels GA 400 very similar to how Satellite Blvd was built called Ronald Reagan Blvd.

They could be trying to make traffic reports more confusing in the future. :/


Yeah, as if it wasn't bad enough with all the Peachtrees around... Ugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 03:44 PM
Status: "Ready for Fall" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Atlanta
4,645 posts, read 3,015,634 times
Reputation: 3862
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil0311 View Post
And how did I do that? I stated my OPINION which is how I feel. I would not put my children in the Atlanta Schools...fact.
You complained about ridiculous stereotypes, and then spewed your own version of several in your very next post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 04:33 PM
 
7,554 posts, read 4,054,597 times
Reputation: 2874
Streets named Ronald Reagan are pretty common. The Forsyth County 'Ronnie' runs south from GA 20 to Majors Rd, East of GA 400. My post is totally accurate.
Quote:
FORSYTH COUNTY — Forsyth County residents may see construction begin to thin traffic congestion along Ga. 400 and other sore spots by next year after a $200 million bond referendum to fund road projects passed in Tuesday’s election.

Voters approved the measure by about a 63 percent to 37 percent split, with 34,764 votes in favor and 20,030 votes against. The decision likely will create a slight increase in property taxes for 20 years to pay off the bonds.

Of the $200 million in funding, $81 million will be used for projects for which the Georgia Department of Transportation has allocated $93 million in leveraged funding, including the widening of Ga. 400 from McFarland Parkway to Bald Ridge Marina Road.

If voters had rejected the bond measure, proponents feared state funding would disappear. The remaining $119 million is proposed for county projects.

Carter Patterson, chair of the Taxpayers United to Reduce Forsyth Traffic campaign committee, said Tuesday night that the county’s population is growing at about 7 percent per year.

“Our low taxes, quality schools and parks have attracted many people to call Forsyth County their home,” he said. “With that high growth has come growing pains for our roads. Our residents feel this every day.

“The transportation bond will give relief to our citizens and help attract commercial investment.”

Patterson said he was expecting about a 60-to-40 vote margin.

James McCoy, the president and CEO of the Cumming-Forsyth County Chamber of Commerce echoed Patterson’s remarks, saying he “had a sense the community, by and large, was supportive of [the project] to widen [Ga.] 400. That this was a good idea.”

McCoy went on to say he was “very pleased” that Forsyth County voters “by such a really nice margin expressed their support that they’re willing to give this level of support to transportation projects for our community.”

However, not everyone was as pleased with the voters’ decision.

“It’s not unexpected,” said Tony DeMaria of the Homeowners Coalition, which opposed the bond proposal. “I am disappointed. Homeowners are 90-plus percent of the citizens in this county, and yet they have no voice or little voice among elected officials.”

During the county’s annual Transportation Summit in October, District 24 State Rep. Mark Hamilton of Cumming said the average person in Georgia invests about $85 a year in roads and bridges.

With the approval of the bond, the estimated impact on a tax bill for a home valued at $250,000 is, on average, $121 a year.

“I can’t think of any one thing we can do [in Forsyth County] that has a positive impact on businesses and job growth and everyday lives than the widening of Ga. 400,” McCoy said.

He and other supporters of the bond hope the upcoming projects will relieve congestion, shorten commute times and encourage more commercial development.

With the passage of the referendum, the plan is to widen Ga. 400 from McFarland Parkway to Bald Ridge Marina Road, using $53 million of the bond funding. The state is expected to contribute another $10 million.

Hamilton, who is on the state legislature’s transportation committee, said he confirmed with transportation department leaders Wednesday morning that an internal meeting is set for Monday to begin planning the Ga. 400 project.

“It’s my job to make sure the conditions of the bond from a state standpoint are honored and [that the DOT] will provide funding as was determined [in the proposal,” Hamilton said. “One of my goals is for construction to be started by 2015, and I’m confident it will be.”

Four other projects for which the county and state will be partners include widening of Hwy. 371 from Hwy. 9 to Kelly Mill Road; widening of Hwy. 369 between Hwys. 9 and 306; and intersection improvements at Hwy. 369 and McGinnis Ferry Road at 400.

Other efforts, which will be funded solely through local bond funds, are an extension of Ronald Reagan Boulevard from Majors Road to McFarland Parkway, and widening projects on McGinnis Ferry, Old Atlanta, Pilgrim Mill and Union Hill roads.
http://http://www.forsythnews.com/se...article/26058/
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingImport View Post
Am I missing something? Ronald Reagan Parkway is entirely within Gwinnett County... and you're saying Forsyth passed a bond referendum...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 04:40 PM
 
7,554 posts, read 4,054,597 times
Reputation: 2874
Forsyth Ronnie already exists, from GA-20 at the North end to Majors Rd in the South. The extension will run South all the way to McGinnis Ferry. Lots of South-to-North infrastructure being built, as well as cross county, from 9 up to 20 near SE Cherokee County line are other projects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
They are currently building a road that parallels GA 400 very similar to how Satellite Blvd was built called Ronald Reagan Blvd.

They could be trying to make traffic reports more confusing in the future. :/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 05:21 PM
 
28,116 posts, read 24,646,505 times
Reputation: 9528
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR Valentine View Post
I grew up in one of those leafy Philadelphia neighborhoods (Mt. Airy) within walking distance of Chestnut Hill. As I've already pointed out they are the exception, not the rule in the Philly. Single-family detached housing is far less common in Philly than in Atlanta. Moreover, even Chestnut Hill is full of row houses. Most of the housing stock east of Germantown Avenue (it roughly divides the neighborhood in half) are row houses, twins and apartments. The adjoining census tract in Chestnut Hill to the one where the house on Laughlin Lane that you've linked is located has a population density of 12k ppsm.

This building is three blocks from the house on Laughlin Lane (which BTW is located less than one block from the entrance to the Emergency Department of Chestnut Hill Hospital) https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0740...B5y2betG6w!2e0

These houses are an easy walk down Germantown Avenue from the house you linked https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0773...vxTgqWrnaQ!2e0

These are nearby as well https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0728...DTCDvtkSTw!2e0

There'd have to be a major re-write of Atlanta zoning code for it to look like Philadelphia. There isn't one neighborhood in Philly that is as dominated by single-family detached housing as even the relatively dense by Atlanta standards Virginia-Highland. the two cities were developed at different times which is why the land uses in the two cities are so different.

I also don't think Atlanta is going to follow the LA model either. We don't have the same physical barriers to development that LA does. That doesn't mean Atlanta isn't becoming or can't become more densely populated. In the end the quality of development, not density for the sake of density, is what matters anyway.

Well, there's no doubt that in general Philadelphia is much denser than Atlanta. But Philadelphia also has plenty of lower density areas as well.

My point is simply that Atlanta is not so short of land that we need to start tearing up thriving mature neighborhoods in order to accommodate additional population. I mentioned Philadelphia as an example of a city that is able to exist with both low and high density and house a population several times as large as Atlanta within the same geographical area. (And to do so very nicely, I might add).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 05:38 PM
 
28,116 posts, read 24,646,505 times
Reputation: 9528
For those who advocate changing the zoning of thriving single family neighborhoods in order to accommodate a larger population, let me note the following:

-- In 1970 the city of Atlanta easily housed a population of 500,000.

-- We did that with no trains or streetcars whatsoever.

-- Freeways were a small fraction of the size and extent they are today.

-- There were no highrises in either Midtown or Buckhead, and only a few downtown.

-- We had numerous large manufacturing and distribution facilities within the city limits, as well as a large active military base.


Given that we were able to do all this 45 years ago, why should we contemplate dismantling our most successful and desirable single family neighborhoods now? They have been critical to the resurgence of the city and it would be reckless to attack them.


Last edited by arjay57; 12-12-2014 at 06:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 06:05 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
6,899 posts, read 9,589,236 times
Reputation: 5303
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
For those who advocate changing the zoning of thriving single family neighborhoods in order to accommodate a larger population, let me note the following:

-- In 1970 the city of Atlanta easily housed a population of 500,000.

-- We did that with no trains or streetcars whatsoever.

-- Freeways were a small fraction of the size and extent they are today.

-- There were no highrises in either Midtown or Buckhead, and only a few downtown.

-- We had numerous large manufacturing and distribution facilities within the city limits, as well as a large military base.


Given that we were able to do all this 45 years ago, why should we contemplate dismantling our most successful and desirable single family neighborhoods now? They have been critical to the resurgence of the city and it would be reckless to attack them.

One thing that no one has mentioned in this comparison between today and back then... family size. Fewer people in these single family homes than what would have been the norm in the 50s. Families of 4, 5, 6... even 9 or 10 replaced by singles and DINKs in many of these neighborhoods. So you can have a simlar fabric and a much lower overall population count. People with multiple kids headed to the burbs a long time ago.

Waiting on the anecdotal evidence of someone somebody knows with a bunch of kids in VA Highlands, but you all know that nieghborhoods full of kids is not the norm as it would have been 50 - 60 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2014, 09:27 PM
 
28,116 posts, read 24,646,505 times
Reputation: 9528
That's a good point, Saintmarks. I know many intown families with two kids and several with three, but I can't think of any with more than that.

A similar factor is on the other end of the age spectrum. Many families have children who have grown up and moved on. And in a number of cases there may be just one spouse left.
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 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top