Could LA's exodus happen here? (Atlanta, Columbus: loan, buying, construction)

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by primaltech

Los Angeles is over twice as dense as Atlanta, but it's still not dense at all by other major city standards. Especially as the second largest city in the country.

Population (in thousands) per square mile:

New York City: 27.0
San Francisco: 17.2
Boston: 13.3
Chicago: 11.8
Philadelphia: 11.2
Miami: 11.1
Los Angeles: 8.4
Atlanta: 3.3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...lation_density


Interesting fact I just learned: the 4 most dense cities in the US are all in New Jersey.

That cause Los Angeles is 503 sq mi, Some parts are denser than than other like Central LA over the san fernando. Not to mention LA include Mountainous and Water.


Boston is 90 sq mi "half water", Philadelphia is 143 sq mi. Their city limits is just their central area which are the most dense part of them. LA on the other hand core density is off set by the less dense areas and etc because it's 503 sq mi, but central LA is extremely dense, In fact LA dose look like a 10 million city.







So it's ironic are perception of LA is shape by Hollywood showing the more suburban areas of that 503 sq mi.


https://c1.staticflickr.com/2/1171/8...39f9798e_b.jpg

but central LA is very urban, easily one of the most in the country.


Central LA--- I don't know the numbers as of now I would imagine it being denser but Central Los Angeles in 2000 had 836,638 residents in its 57.87 square miles.... 14,458 people per square mile, This Make Central LA denser than Boston.





http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2384/...e576d589_b.jpg


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1245/...17a623cb_b.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/...a896f49b_b.jpg


http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i1...rialtower8.jpg


http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1068/1...58f59de0_b.jpg


http://farm1.static.flickr.com/148/3...ad88e74f_b.jpg

Anyways.... LA urban area is actually more dense than NY, not the city proper but the LA metro area. It's because it's so develop and continuous. It's not just Atlanta with some home lots in suburbs being huge, nearly all cities east of the Mississippi especially the Piedmont and the Northeast have some suburbs develop like this. So what suburban Atlanta is to suburban Houston and DFW, is what Suburban New York is to Suburban LA.


But both NY and LA from Newark to Long Beach have dense even suburbs that if they was outside of their metro they would be mid tire cities. This creates Land scarcity. which create the prices

LA is basically at a point they have 2 options, either build upward, or sprawl into the desert. "inland empire" This is why Cali is so expensive.

• Los Angeles MSA 12,828,837
  
• Inland Empire (San Bernardino, Riverside MSA) 4,224,851
  
• Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura MSA 849,738

----------------------
Creates The Greater LA MSA,

Greater Los Angeles CSA18,679,763


For Population, L.A. County's Loss Is The Inland Empire's Gain

According to Census figures, America's largest county-to-county population shift between 2007 and 2011 occurred out of Los Angeles County, and into San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, with 35,000 more people moving there than in the opposite direction. The L.A.-to-Inland numbers were even more stark between 2000 and 2006, sitting at a whopping 300,000. The Inland Empire is now one of the nation's fastest-growing economies as a result, and Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario is now America's 13th-largest MSA, ahead of Seattle, San Diego and Denver.

Although it may be the case in some circumstances, this growth isn't because people are just dying to live in the Inland Empire. According to Trulia's real estate heat maps, the strongest demand throughout greater SoCal remains for land closest to the Pacific Ocean. Rather, a climate of Nimbyism and regulation in Los Angeles has--similar to how I described in a recent article about San Francisco—inflated housing prices and pushed people east.

To put a finer point on it: people who enjoy accessing the jobs, culture and geography of Los Angeles, but can't afford the housing there, instead "drive until they qualify," to the nearest locale that has a similar vibe at prices they can afford. Riverside, where median home prices are $350,000 (compared to $566,000 in L.A. County), and San Bernardino, where they are $253,000, both fill this need.

The Cenus treat them as two different MSA under one CSA. Even though the LA MSA may not be growing like Atlanta, DFW, Houston, Miami, Phoenix the other Sunbelt cities the inland Empire this unknown giant MSA actually is.

two things

1. Atlanta does not have LA land scarcity issues.

2. LA is actually growing as the "inland empire"

[bu2]

Los Angeles actually has the densest urban area in the country, with San Francisco 2nd and New York 3rd. Now that is the urban/developed area, not just the densest part (obviously Manhattan is a lot denser than anything in California).

Atlanta is easily the least dense of the largest urban areas. Until you get to #38 Charlotte, no other is less dense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Atlanta grew, people flocked in groves, Atlanta offers a strong job market in several professions, sales, real estate, IT with several fortune 500 companies based withing it (Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, NCR, Sprint, AT&T, Delta, Porsche just to name a few). you're going to pay to live in place like that.

Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, Sprint and Porsche are not headquartered here. They all have major facilities here, but they are no more HQ'd in Atlanta than Amazon is.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by bu2

Los Angeles actually has the densest urban area in the country, with San Francisco 2nd and New York 3rd. Now that is the urban/developed area, not just the densest part (obviously Manhattan is a lot denser than anything in California).

Atlanta is easily the least dense of the largest urban areas. Until you get to #38 Charlotte, no other is less dense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas

Which is again misleading the core regions off set by sprawl.

A Urban area continue as long as it meet the low density requirement, So Atlanta urban area is looking a density of 2,645 sq mi vs. Seattle just looking at density of it's 1,010 sq mi

Both Metros MSA are over 8,000 sq mi. but just with in 1,800 sq mi Atlanta would be far denser than Seattle in 1,800 sq mi. Infact in 1,800 sq mi Atlanta 5 core counties have population similar to entire Seattle Metro of 8,186 sq mi. So Atlanta it's urban area density would be misleading. Atlanta 5 core county region is somewhere in the top 15 most dense part of the country. but outside Atlanta core counties the density drops sprawls in low density.

This the top 100, Dekalb is 16th Most dense county of the top 100 counties, And Cobb, and Gwinnett Counties are not too far behide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States


So Metro Atlanta is basically a bargin for it population size and density. What helps Atlanta are low taxes and no natural barriers. So land scarcity is not a major issue.


The denser cities on coast land scarcity and taxes are cause them to be more expensive.

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by JMatl

Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, Sprint and Porsche are not headquartered here. They all have major facilities here, but they are no more HQ'd in Atlanta than Amazon is.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Not global, but Porsche North American headquarter is in Atlanta.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

Which is again misleading the core regions off set by sprawl.

A Urban area continue as long as it meet the low density requirement, So Atlanta urban area is looking a density of 2,645 sq mi vs. Seattle just looking at density of it's 1,010 sq mi

Both Metros MSA are over 8,000 sq mi. but just with in 1,800 sq mi Atlanta would be far denser than Seattle in 1,800 sq mi. Infact in 1,800 sq mi Atlanta 5 core counties have population similar to entire Seattle Metro of 8,186 sq mi. So Atlanta it's urban area density would be misleading. Atlanta 5 core county region is somewhere in the top 15 most dense part of the country. but outside Atlanta core counties the density drops sprawls in low density.

This the top 100, Dekalb is 16th Most dense county of the top 100 counties, And Cobb, and Gwinnett Counties are not too far behide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States


So Metro Atlanta is basically a bargin for it population size and density. What helps Atlanta are low taxes and no natural barriers. So land scarcity is not a major issue.


The denser cities on coast land scarcity and taxes are cause them to be more expensive.

You're comparing the densest portion of Atlanta to all of Seattle. That's not a relevant comparison.

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

Not global, but Porsche North American headquarter is in Atlanta.

I'm aware of that, but the Global HQ's are in Stuttgart.

It's misleading to claim their HQ's are here, though. Likewise with H-P, Cisco and Sprint.

[BELMO45]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Atlanta is still a lot cheaper than LA, like a lot cheaper. The only places that are truly expensive are neighborhoods in and around Midtown and Buckhead. You guys really overstate how expensive Atlanta is. Go live in LA or SF or Seattle and it's not even just the city that's expensive. Literally much of the entire metro area is expensive.

It’s pretty bad. IMO there is zero reason for Atlanta to be so much more overpriced than places like Columbus Dallas Houston Las Vegas Chicago and it’s grossly more overpriced than all of those

[brownhornet]

People move here because they THINK its cheap to live...because at one point it was. That and the fact that there are jobs available. But reality is, it's really not cheap anymore but still a bit cheaper than some of the northern and western cities. Ive said before, I've seen rent damn near double in Smyrna in the past 10 years for the same complexes where you used to be able to get a 1BR for 550-600 a month in a decent spot. Better yet take a look at the complexes along Terrill Mill Rd. You could get a 1BR over there for next to nothing 7 years ago. Now all of a sudden they're pushing near $1,000 a month. And im talking OLD complexes. I could show you my original lease in a nice complex in Smyrna that I moved into in 2006 where I paid $515 a month. Cable included and all. That same unit goes for $975 today.

[BELMO45]

Originally Posted by Nukacola

It’s not though except Columbus - which is smaller , especially not Chicago. This sounds like troll.

Dallas is dirt cheap. I can get apartments in places within 10 minutes of downtown for 900-1200 a month which is nearly impossible here