Atlanta vs. Charlotte (Marietta, Dallas, Washington: 2009, layoffs, new construction)

[architect77]

Originally Posted by qc dreamin

I agree. Atlanta and charlotte are not that far off from each other. The biggest diffference is the feel of the two cities. I would say that Charlotte is more east coast and Atlanta is more downsouth. And by the Atl folks don't forget that Charlotte is actually a lot bigger than Atlanta. The metro area of Atlanta is just bigger than Charlottes. Both areas have nba,nfl, and nascar. Both areas have world class musuems and amusement parks. Both areas have reliable mass transit systems(HEAVY TRAFFIC). Both areas rank in the top ten in Fortune 500 headquarters. And by the way, Charlotte is actually the 5th largest urban area in the country behind NYC,CHI-town,LA, and MIA. 12million people live with 100sqmiles of Charlotte compared to only 7million people within 100sq miles of ATL. I know that there is a little rivalry between the two cities and both embellish but you would really love both of them. And by the way Alpharetta can't even compare to Gastonia,NC.

Charlotte is the "center" of the 5th largest urban region, however your numbers are way off. About 7 million people live within a 100 mile radius, not 12 million. Miami is not in the top five either. It's NYC, LA, Chicago, DC-Philly, Charlotte. The metros of Greensboro/Winston-Salem, Asheville, Greenville-Spartanburg, and Columbia are all within 100 miles of Charlotte which give it this ranking.

[atlantaATL]

Originally Posted by DeaconJ

Did he really say this? What a complete idiot! You lost the argument with your lies and incorrect statistics...that's a fact that anyone can see. You're wrong, plain and simple. There was no strategic retreat, I just grew tired of your pathetic arguments.

I posted the Correct information about ridership and riders per sq mile so he was wrong in his numbers.

[westboy33]

dude Charlotte will and can never be anything close to Atlanta!!!
the state of georgia is called empire of the south for a reason...

[crider]

Good! Why would Charlotte want to be like Atlanta? I like Atlanta but really all theses sunbelt cities from Charlotte to Dallas are pretty much the same except for size. These cities are all fairly new to the big leauges thus they have not aged into their true idenity. The two cities of size in the south that are truly mature cities are pre Katrina New Orleans and old Charleston SC. they have developed there true character through the years and feel Urban because of their Dense core city. I would say that Charleston and New Orleans would be only city in the south that would be on a foreign tourist list of MUST see cities in the South. Atlanta is the Capital of the new South and has more highrise bulidings than any other southeastern city (not counting Miami) Atlanta has even more high rises than Paris France and being from Charlotte I am Okay with that. What makes a city vibrant is what is happening at street level (New Orleans & Charleston) not on the 40th floor and that is what these sunbelt cities lack. One of the worse planning mistakes that Atlanta ever made was destroying the original Underground. The Original underground promoted foot traffic and filled the downtown street with tourist and locals who would venture from the Westin and Hyatt to the underground for nighttime entertainment after the Braves ballgames.

[DeaconJ]

Originally Posted by crider

Good! Why would Charlotte want to be like Atlanta? I like Atlanta but really all theses sunbelt cities from Charlotte to Dallas are pretty much the same except for size. These cities are all fairly new to the big leauges thus they have not aged into their true idenity. The two cities of size in the south that are truly mature cities are pre Katrina New Orleans and old Charleston SC. they have developed there true character through the years and feel Urban because of their Dense core city. I would say that Charleston and New Orleans would be only city in the south that would be on a foreign tourist list of MUST see cities in the South. Atlanta is the Capital of the new South and has more highrise bulidings than any other southeastern city (not counting Miami) Atlanta has even more high rises than Paris France and being from Charlotte I am Okay with that. What makes a city vibrant is what is happening at street level (New Orleans & Charleston) not on the 40th floor and that is what these sunbelt cities lack. One of the worse planning mistakes that Atlanta ever made was destroying the original Underground. The Original underground promoted foot traffic and filled the downtown street with tourist and locals who would venture from the Westin and Hyatt to the underground for nighttime entertainment after the Braves ballgames.

1. Sorry, but you are incorrect...all of southern U.S. cities ARE NOT the same - in size as well as many other aspects. For one thing, Atlanta has been a big city for a long time. Even though there has been tremendous growth here for the past 20 years, there was also tremendous growth from the city's inception. Atlanta was an important railroad and manufacturing center by 1860...Sherman wouldn't have bothered with capturing and burning the city if it didn't exist, right?

Downtown Atlanta, 1864...looks nice and dense to me.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10054722@N07/3366104475/



2. Following the burning of Atlanta in 1865, there was a huge boom in population and development that brought much attention to the city...especially in 1895 when Atlanta hosted the World's Fair and drew 800,000 visitors: Cotton_States_and_International_Exposition_(1895)

By 1900 the population of Atlanta was 100,000 - while Charlotte was still a tiny blip on the radar at 19,000 and Charleston was still at 55,000. Charlotte didn't reach the 100,000 mark until 40 years later. New Orleans was already much larger at 300,000 (12th in the nation) but that doesn't diminish the fact that Atlanta was a large city with a developed urban core.

Downtown Atlanta, 1904

Atlanta, Ga., by Night in 1904(?) on Flickr - Photo Sharing!


Peachtree Street/Atlanta, 1906 compared to King Street/Charleston, 1910 - both seem to have a dense core at this point.

File:Peachtree1907.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Charleston, South Carolina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



3. By 1920, Atlanta had doubled in population to 200,000...and development of a dense urban core continued - long before the automobile became a fact of everyday life. By 1940 the population was 300,000 and Atlanta had was an important regional center for transportation, industry, finance, culture, and employment.

Downtown Atlanta, 1920

Amerika_60 - Georgia, Atlanta on Flickr - Photo Sharing!


Downtown Atlanta, 1940

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10054722@N07/3382010137/



4. Atlanta's urban core developed over 100 years ago, and a large part of that core is still in existence. That's why there is an entire Downtown historic district with turn-of-the-century structures lining Marietta, Walton, Poplar, Luckie, Williams, Carnegie, Cone, Fairlie, Forsyth, Broad, and Peachtree Streets - known as Fairlie-Poplar. The city has developed all around this core...there is a shiny new skyline that everyone sees in photos and from a distance, but the historical heart of Atlanta is still intact among those buildings, you have to get off of the interstate in order to see it. Resources:
Fairlie-Poplar Historic District--National Register of Historic Places
Fairlie-Poplar Historic District
Fairlie-Poplar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
History of Downtown

Downtown Atlanta, 2008

ATL Winter on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[crider]

DeaconJ I agree with you that Atlanta has been a large city a long time if you want to use comparable southern cities as a guide. Atlanta and Birmingham were the largest cities of the South for many decades with populations in the 200,000 to 350,000 range. I was speaking of large cities on a national scale. Atlanta Metro did not reach One Million until the mid sixities. It was not likely to be mistaken for Philly Boston or the other large northern cities and did not compare in size.It was during the sixites civil rights movement that Atlanta started to be recognized as a truly National City. In a way the civil rights movement freed Atlanta so that growth could occur as other companies started to invest and breakup the old guard that had protected Atlanta from "outside influences." We all know what happen with the Bham. Charlotte growth comes at the expense of the Ham not Atlanta. After these outsiders realized that they could grow and prosper other cities in the region were looked at. I belief that Charotte owes a lot of it's present success to the success these companies had in Atlanta. When I made the comparison with Charleston and New Orleans I was not speaking of population but of being unique NOW. The reasons Charleston and New Orleans are unique now is because they did not experience rapid growth. Notice that in the picture you posted from 1907 how much different Peachtree looks today and how much King Street of 1907 resembles the King Street of today.

Looking at the older pictures above you see that Atlanta was quite urban during that period. If you look at any city of size during that period they will appear to be more urban than they are now. One reason is the suburbs had not been invented yet. People in Charlotte rave about Uptown being urban. The fact is it not near as urban as it was in the late fifites and early sixities There was 4 department stores, pool rooms, theaters, pawn shops, people out on the sidewalks ,warehouses and factories. In your pictures are streetcars. Charlotte had an extensive network that went into the residential areas of the city. Now both cities are going to spend millions to bring them back. Atlanta super growth began in the sixities at the birth of the car culture when the new model for cities was Southern Califiornia so many cities with room to expand (Sunbelt) did so by sprawling including Charlotte.

Charlotte was not a player during most of the twentieth century. I would say that it has only been since the begining of this century that Charlotte has been moving toward becoming a National City. Evidenlty it is moving in this direction fast. It was not long ago that if I was 500 miles from Charlotte no one had ever heard of it. Personally I had never pictured Charlotte as being a large city until I began reading this forum. It has made me aware that Charlotte has most of the amenities of big city. Mutilple Foutune Five Hundred Head Quarters, Highly regarded Medical And Educational instituions, a transportation hub, international airline flights, pofessional sports and many shopping outlets plus being a city of nearly 700,000 and a metro area of two million and 6 million people within a 100 mile radius. Does this make it as large as Atlanta. No, and I could care less. I have always had the NYC, Chicagos LAs and San Francisco's as models for big cities. I have now lowered my standards for defining a Big City.

I am very familiar with Atlanta. I know how to get around the traffic jams and was visiting Atlanta when Davidsons and Richs were the main department stores and Lennox was a shopping center and not a mall
So I am very familiar with the historic areas you mention. We have these same type of historical areas in Charlotte but thats excatly what they are historical areas. They no longer define the city.
I have been all over the country and the Sunbelt is really the last frontier. The cities are still growing
and have not yet fully matured. Atlanta or Charlotte offers great opportunities both will prosper and other sunbelt cities will rise to challenge them since the entire area is attractive today to businesses and developers. What will urbanize these cities in a way they once were is not High Rise buildings but High Gas Prices.

(divided into paragraphs by Moderator to make it easier to read)

[DeaconJ]

The point is...that urban core of Downtown Atlanta that you see in the vintage photos IS STILL THERE. It didn't disappear and it wasn't demolished. So Atlanta is as urban as it was in 1900 - but moreso with all of the urban development since that time. It doesn't make any sense to say that the city was "more" urban back then. Atlanta isn't bringing back the streetcar network...we have heavy rail system that is heavily utilized, and the beltway will be LRT, not streetcars. Birmingham was nearly as large as Atlanta at one time, but going back further to 1890-1900, Birmingham barely existed. THAT is the difference.

Charlotte does not have the same type of historic areas that you find in Atlanta...they just don't exist. Charlotte does not have the same inventory of 100 year-old highrises that you find in Atlanta...they just don't exist in a similar number. Charlotte doesn't have the same historic urban core that you find in Atlanta...it just doesn't exist. Charlotte and Atlanta are very different cities in very different leagues. Charlotte is a fine city, but it isn't comparable to Atlanta...and it's crazy to make statements like "All sunbelt cities are the same." They aren't - by a longshot.

The comments you made earlier are of a different tone than the ones above...they were wrong. Atlanta was never "protected" by any old guard from outside infuences...Henry Grady began marketing Atlanta in the northeast with his "New South" slogan in the 1870s, which led to economic investment in the city that helped bring it out of the hard times of reconstruction.

[JoeP]

Both the Atlanta and Birmingham metros were around the same size in 1940 - 800,000.

I mention 1940 because it is before the post war auto driven suburban boom, so much of this is dense urban population.

Also at that time, both cities would rank on the higher end of population for U.S. metros. Only a handful had over 1 million people. At that time DC was just at a million. The only others were Pittsburgh, St Louis, Philadelphia, Boston, LA, San Francisco, NY, Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland. I think maybe a couple others.

Atlanta does have some nice old buildings, however they did also destroy some older buildings too and famously almost leveled the Fox.

Charlotte, was much smaller pre war and yes has less historical fabric, but what's important for these cities is smart growth.

Charlotte does appear to be doing a nice job of building a really nice center city. It can't create early 20th century, but if it builds in a smart way, at least it can be a very nice city of today.

I think the complaint of sunbelt cities is the endless sprawl, which to be fair is not just a problem of sunbelt cities, but it is pretty bad and most people don't care other than complain about traffic and want solutions which don't help

[bgNCATL]

Originally Posted by DeaconJ

You tell lies...you post obviously manipulated numbers that are just plain wrong. There is no civic pride here...I GREW UP IN CHARLOTTE, Einstein. I love Charlotte...I hate you and people like you who try to promote their city when it isn't justified. Charlotte IS far behind Atlanta...the majority in this forum agree. Now, go back to your little medium-sized city and revel in your medium-sized amenities. I'm tired of you.

I agree with everything you say DeaconJ. I'm from Greensboro, NC and have been in Atlanta for about 8 years. I have read through all of these post and I have done nothing but laugh at the post that some of these Charlotte people are making. I use to hang out in Charlotte all the time back in the day and I often stop by when I'm driving home. I use to think Charlotte was huge until I moved to Atlanta. Now when I drive through, it feels small in comparison. The uptown skyline is very nice, but small. It's about 7 or 8 blocks in one direction and 3 in the other. People up there like to say that Atlanta's skyline is spread out, but they don't realize that downtown Atlanta by itself is just as big and urban as Charlotte's downtown. This is not including midtown and Buckhead. When riding down 85 and you look over at Buckhead, it could easily rival Charlotte's uptown. Charlotte need about 150 more tall building and about 4 million more people to catch Atlanta. Actually, I think ATL has almost built more building in the past 10 or 15 years than the total number of building in Uptown Charlotte. I don't understand How they think Charlotte is catching up?

[bgNCATL]

I wonder why people from Charlotte keep saying that they have over 2 million in it's metro. The metro is actually around 1.7 million. Charlotte's CSA is over 2 million, Not the MSA.