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 09-11-2015, 04:51 PM
 
9,915 posts, read 6,901,969 times
Reputation: 3017

Advertisements

I never said we are going to somehow stay perfectly in our existing footprint.

You are the one that seems to think it is impossible for Atlanta to get as dense as european cities.

As for neighborhoods resisting density, just look at what is happening in Midtown and other areas. High rises on top of former single family homes. Also, we are already using road diets to switch car lanes to support denser transportation options like walking and biking. New transit lines will be running through inner city neighborhood in the next decade via the Beltline and Clifton Corridor. That will continue to accelerate too.

So all the things you are saying will never happen in Atlanta are already starting to happen today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2015, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,458 posts, read 7,261,125 times
Reputation: 4205
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
I never said we are going to somehow stay perfectly in our existing footprint.

You are the one that seems to think it is impossible for Atlanta to get as dense as european cities.

And yes, Atlanta does have more lane-miles than most other cities on the planet.
No it doesn't have that much space dedicated to transportation actually.

It has far fewer alignments, so a few of them are wide, like the downtown connector... that doesn't change our weaknesses in other places... like lack of parallel freeways and small, narrow arterial network.

Most are further a part and narrower and we have don't have as many roads to split the amount of traffic. Just look at your Florence comparison to Cumberland and county the streets.


To the bolded... I'm sorry if there are reading comprehension issues, but that is directly what the discussion was about. Someone asked whether it would be density or outward growth. Someone said both, someone said density, and I went with both.

You then argued back and directly saying directly that was plenty of land inside the existing foot print of the metro. That was pretty much the point of this discussion.

Yes, Atlanta will not get as dense as a European city of equal size unless you want to clear cut our intown neighborhoods and start from scratch, that will be a really difficult sell and extremely costly to the area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 05:08 PM
bu2
 
8,974 posts, read 5,670,985 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
First, spare me the story about whining. If you can't handle a disagreement or a debate, that is on you. No reason to act like a kid in grade school pretending like one of us is simply whining, because you disagree.

You can not buy it all you want, but that is what is already happening, whether you like it or not. We are already 5 years into that 20 and you'd have to be blind to not see how much the urban area is still growing.

Now if you want to talk about widespread neighborhood destruction, building a real urban arterial and collector street network and get off your high horse about being anti-road as you are, then yes we could probably move in the direction of Atlanta being a far denser place in a more North American style given the cost realities of modern building contruction.

At the moment, with your collective concepts of urban planning on this forum and the intown political headwinds... you're adding a few hundred thousand on infill properties, while pushing out industrial activities outside the core (which still leads to outward expansion of the urban area, btw!)

Even with changes in modern urban design it is a pipe dream to believe we'd build anything like an extremely old European city that literally had many hundreds of years to build itself in a different economic and social reality. It was built an older era with a different economic reality and that goes completely against the political headwinds I have discussed as we don't have that road network and we would literally have to clearcut existing neighborhoods to make that happen and you'd be fighting a big battle to find an affordable way to build something like that and convince enough people to buy-in.

Even then, it is completely missing how many streets ARE in Florence in the small area and are not present in the Cumberland area or even many parts of our intown areas. You can complain about how wide the freeways or the arterial roads get here, but only a tiny fraction of the amount of roads (and by extension lane miles) actually exist compared to these denser cities.


So while we will find ways to add density.... If you think we are growing by 2.8 million people in just 20 years only using a more expensive density-only strategy ... you're dreaming. Not to mention the outright hypocrisy from in-towners sitting on large lots fighting for neighborhood preservation over large swaths of land, while disillusionally believing 2.8m fill in the cracks in developments that often come with higher costs..

It ain't going to happen... not by that amount. There are too many NIMBYs throughout our whole region and it isn't just an ITP, OTP, Core, urban, or suburban philosophy in this region.
Florence has a very dense street network. And it has pretty consistent mid rises with almost no unused space in the core. Think Inman Park immediately around Krog St. Market over the whole city. Florence also doesn't have trains. As small as it is, the buses work pretty well. And they run frequently, so you don't really need a schedule. You just need to know the number and where the stop is (and of course know enough Italian to buy the bus tickets at the corner store). Atlanta doesn't have that density all over and doesn't have the street network.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 05:17 PM
bu2
 
8,974 posts, read 5,670,985 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
No it doesn't have that much space dedicated to transportation actually.

It has far fewer alignments, so a few of them are wide, like the downtown connector... that doesn't change our weaknesses in other places... like lack of parallel freeways and small, narrow arterial network.

Most are further a part and narrower and we have don't have as many roads to split the amount of traffic. Just look at your Florence comparison to Cumberland and county the streets.


To the bolded... I'm sorry if there are reading comprehension issues, but that is directly what the discussion was about. Someone asked whether it would be density or outward growth. Someone said both, someone said density, and I went with both.

You then argued back and directly saying directly that was plenty of land inside the existing foot print of the metro. That was pretty much the point of this discussion.

Yes, Atlanta will not get as dense as a European city of equal size unless you want to clear cut our intown neighborhoods and start from scratch, that will be a really difficult sell and extremely costly to the area.
I can't think of any other big city that has such big residential lots as Atlanta. Unless you tear down Buckhead, you aren't going to get that level of density. Compare Atlanta's density (3,174/sm 2010 census population of 420,256) to another sprawl model-Houston inside the Loop (443,949-97 sm) and its only about 2/3 of Houston's 4,743/sm. And Houston's densest areas are outside the loop. Atlanta has a very, very long way to go to get to European densities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2015, 09:23 AM
bu2
 
8,974 posts, read 5,670,985 times
Reputation: 3540
AJC article saying it will be 8 million by 2040. That's a little more realistic than 2030.

New metro population forecast: 8 million | www.myajc.com

Article says most of the growth will be in the suburbs, but "significant" growth will be closer in.

Also says the core, major employment centers and major highway corridors will have 44% of the jobs, down from 47%, reflecting the strength of growth in those other areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2015, 09:48 AM
 
9,915 posts, read 6,901,969 times
Reputation: 3017
Deny it all you want. But Atlanta's planners and developers are preparing for a denser, multi modal future. You don't need to tear down buckhead all at once, we are tearing it down a parcel at a time, in fact that shows how we are seeing examples today of former suburban single-family neighborhoods transform into dense walkable nodes. Taking the over sized roadways and increase the capacity with other modes of transportation and and connections made to ensure the street grid links up where it needs to be is already happening today. Atlanta is capable of getting denser and is getting denser by the day on its way back towards that. Sure, there may be some that take issue with "their" roadway lanes being taken to support alternate and developers buy single family homes a dozen at a time to build a new development with a new street grid. But that doesn't mean it is already coming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2015, 10:01 AM
bu2
 
8,974 posts, read 5,670,985 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
Deny it all you want. But Atlanta's planners and developers are preparing for a denser, multi modal future. You don't need to tear down buckhead all at once, we are tearing it down a parcel at a time, in fact that shows how we are seeing examples today of former suburban single-family neighborhoods transform into dense walkable nodes. Taking the over sized roadways and increase the capacity with other modes of transportation and and connections made to ensure the street grid links up where it needs to be is already happening today. Atlanta is capable of getting denser and is getting denser by the day on its way back towards that. Sure, there may be some that take issue with "their" roadway lanes being taken to support alternate and developers buy single family homes a dozen at a time to build a new development with a new street grid. But that doesn't mean it is already coming.
Do you have any examples of something like that where it wasn't already zoned for something denser?

Atlanta's NPUs make it difficult to change anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2015, 02:32 PM
 
28,136 posts, read 24,659,949 times
Reputation: 9534
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
Deny it all you want. But Atlanta's planners and developers are preparing for a denser, multi modal future. You don't need to tear down buckhead all at once, we are tearing it down a parcel at a time, in fact that shows how we are seeing examples today of former suburban single-family neighborhoods transform into dense walkable nodes.
Why not protect Buckhead and a few other neighborhoods where people place a high value on ER, and simply jack up the density elsewhere?

There are miles and miles of underdeveloped areas throughout the city. For example, Grant Park, Cascade and Candler park can easily handle gazillions of additional apartments. Go there, and pick the low hanging fruit first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2015, 05:17 PM
 
27,760 posts, read 24,784,942 times
Reputation: 16479
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
Why not protect Buckhead and a few other neighborhoods where people place a high value on ER, and simply jack up the density elsewhere?
I don't think he's talking about the historic residential part of Buckhead with the expensive mansions, but the commercial district. SOB is a good example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2015, 03:59 PM
 
6,795 posts, read 6,594,417 times
Reputation: 5411
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
I think you're right. We are attracting heavy growth from a young population that have higher birth rates and lower death rates. I noticed how that website showed a dramatic increase in blacks between 2020 and 2030. My assumption is they are anticipating the black migration to Atlanta will continue and the population will maintain higher birthrates. I am a little curious how long that trend will sustain itself as economic conditions and job opportunities for blacks in other regions of the U.S. improve. I don't think all areas of the U.S. are the same in this regard currently, but I suspect there will be a positive trajectory for most over time.

I'm not sure how accurate this site will be or won't be in the long-run.

My first assumption is it is over estimating things a small bit. It is is a bit higher than ARC estimates, but almost after seeing this the ARC announced they are anticipating an upward shift in how much growth they were anticipating, so maybe it really is possible.

One thing I will note is this site is not going by MSA boundaries, which makes it hard to compare.

They aren't saying it will grow by nearly 2.8 million in 15 years, but 20... just 5 of those years already happened

In 2014 census estimates the MSA was at 5.6 million and grew averaging about 82,000/year increase, since 2010.

These were slow growth years, being closer to the aftermath of the recession. At that average rate we can expect 1.6m more over the 20 years period, so the assumption is the growth rate will pick up for an added 1.1m more seems possible.... even if it is a bit over-estimated.

This means we'd need to average 154k in annual growth for the remaining 16 years.

It is possible, but seems a touch overly ambitious. I can see 154k in annual growth here, but not over every year for the next 16.

Of course this is all confusing from the fact that the ARC 10 county area, the MSA, and the boundaries from this website are all different...
In that particular website, they just used the rapid growth for blacks from 2000-2010 and extrapolated. I still think we're going to see a dramatic fall in black growth on the 2020 census. Cities like Houston, Dallas, Charlotte, Raleigh all seen much higher black growth over the last 10 years. Black growth responds very well with economic conditions and Atlanta's economic conditions from 2005-2015 has been average to below average to say the least. Could it speed up? Yes, but I believe Atlanta's huge black growth years are over(90s-early 2000s).
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