Densest Census Districts 2020 (Atlanta, Boston, Buckhead: 2013, apartments, neighborhoods)

[atlanta_millenial]

In 2010, the densest census district in metro Atlanta was in midtown, between North and 10th from W. Peachtree to Juniper. The density was around 21,000 ppsm (people per square mile). A couple of the neighboring districts were above 12,000 ppsm.

I'm curious which census districts you expect to be the densest in the 2020 census, and what you think those densities will be. For reference, there are neighborhoods in New York and San Francisco above 130,000 ppsm, and DC, Miami, and Boston all had some around 70,000 ppsm.

There has been a lot of residential construction in Midtown, Buckhead, and the Old Fourth Ward since 2010 with a lot more expected over the next five years, so I expect all of these districts to see increasing density, but I'll leave it up to discussion what you expect the exact density to be.

[bryantm3]

probably the 2020 census will show a maximum of 30-40,000 ppsm in the 2020 census, and in one of the midtown tracts. i would be very surprised if it was above that.

[Gulch]

Probably the same tracts with more density.

[waronxmas]

Before we go further, let's make sure everyone understands what population density is and inst.

Population density is a formula created by take the amount of people live in a given area of land and dividing that number by the size of the area in square miles. Another way of saying this is X / Y = P where X = population and Y = area. For example, if you have 20,000 people living in an area that is 0.5 square miles in size then the population density for that area is 40,000 per square mile.

Population density is (in most cases) not literally X amount of living in a given square mile. The neighborhoods cited in the OPs posts that boast population densities above 50,000 or higher are generally small areas in square miles that boast a high density building development of the ugly variety. Oddly enough, Atlanta used to have neighborhoods with population densities this high when the housing projects were around.

A great example of this in Manhattan is the commie block, err, I mean public housing development Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village. They cover an area of 0.271 square miles and have a combined 29,481 residents, making their population density of 108,785 people per square mile. It looks like this (the big cluster of ugly brown buildings):



Basically, there is a give and take with population density. If you want super high densities, 9 times out of 10 it's going to be super ugly and barely livable.

As for this thread, I don't think it's out the question that Midtown proper will have a density of around 30,000 to 40,000 ppsm by decade's end. There are quite a few residential projects going on right now and lots of space for more.

[bryantm3]

that is true to an extent; however, with high rise development, it's now possible to fit a lot more people in one place comfortably. for example, most tracts in manhattan are at least 80,000 ppsm, in really nice neighbourhoods. even with high rise development, however, it starts to get not-so-nice at 100,000 ppsm or above. there are housing projects in america that top 200,000 ppsm... it's just too many people in one place.

i think a good target for density in a place like midtown would be around 40-60k ppsm, that's probably what we would have if all the empty lots are developed with *nice* apartments. there would be enough people to keep the area active and interesting (like downtown atlanta was back in the 40s), but still enough room for people to get around and have plenty of elbow room, like arjay57 loves so much.

of course, it should be important to note that density for density's sake is not the goal. there are a lot of places in the city limits that would practically max out at 10,000 ppsm, and any more than that would be packing people in like sardines. the ideal density depends on the neighbourhood, and it is more of a sign of a healthy neighbourhood than it is a goal.

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

that is true to an extent; however, with high rise development, it's now possible to fit a lot more people in one place comfortably. for example, most tracts in manhattan are at least 80,000 ppsm, in really nice neighbourhoods. even with high rise development, however, it starts to get not-so-nice at 100,000 ppsm or above. there are housing projects in america that top 200,000 ppsm... it's just too many people in one place.

You are correct in some ways, but I would say that overall Manhattan owes it's density to the 4 to 5 story walkups that dominate block after block in most of borough. While you can achieve very high densities in highrises, that is only a small segment of the Manhattan population and one that due to their income status don't usually have high number of people living in their household.

Originally Posted by bryantm3

i think a good target for density in a place like midtown would be around 40-60k ppsm, that's probably what we would have if all the empty lots are developed with *nice* apartments. there would be enough people to keep the area active and interesting (like downtown atlanta was back in the 40s), but still enough room for people to get around and have plenty of elbow room, like arjay57 loves so much.

That density level is very doable for Midtown and seems about right. To reach that number in Midtown proper, the population would only need to grow by 30,000. That won't happen by 2020, but I think it's achievable in the next 20 years or so. Just look at how far the district has come since the mid-1990s.

Originally Posted by bryantm3

of course, it should be important to note that density for density's sake is not the goal. there are a lot of places in the city limits that would practically max out at 10,000 ppsm, and any more than that would be packing people in like sardines. the ideal density depends on the neighbourhood, and it is more of a sign of a healthy neighbourhood than it is a goal.

This brings up a good point of what cities we should be looking at as a "model" for Atlanta's future densefication. I don't think cities like NYC, Boston, DC or Chicago would be good ones since they gained their density and layout in a bygone era that will never be duplicated in the modern world. Rather, I find that places like Vancouver or one of the Asian megacities like Manila (not including the slums) are more akin to the type of development we'll see: tons of highrises intermixed with midrises and traditional SFH.

[n3w5_junk13]

I agree that Midtown will likely see densities in the 30-40K ppsm range by 2020. I would also like to see all of the census tracts inside the Beltline exceed 5,000 ppsm. A lot of them are very close and headed in that direction. It seems like that would create a more cohesive, strong urban core and serve as a foundation for added livability and density later that could lead to what you see in the "next level" cities.

[Ant131531]

Most of the eastern side of Atlanta( East Midtown, O4W, Inman PArk) had average densities of around 9k-10k in 2010. With all of the projects in O4W and Inman Park, I suspect we may see some 20k ppsm density tracts in the area by 2020.

[bryantm3]

here's what atlanta looks like as of the 2010 census. there is 2013 data, but it's compounded with data back to 2008, so it's not entirely accurate; it shows several tracts as being less dense than they are today. there aren't many tracts inside the beltline that are less than 3,000 ppsm, but there are a lot that have less than 5,000 ppsm. i was thinking before i looked at the data that it wouldn't be a long shot to expect all of the ITB tracts to be at least 5,000 ppsm by 2020, but now i'm not sure if that's a realistic goal.

[bryantm3]

i thought you guys also might find this interesting. these are census block groups, they make up the tracts. there are two in the entire metro that are above 40,000 ppsm. that being said, i don't think either is a really good example of "good density". one is the north avenue georgia tech dormitories (the former olympic village) and the other is the mayfair towers in midtown. while they are nice, neither really address the street very well and don't contain any other uses like retail or office. they are both within walking distance of jobs and retail; however, their presence serves only the people who live there and walls everyone else out.