A Theory About Atlanta (Franklin, Buckhead: crime, hotel, job market)

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by Georgia

To knock Atlanta against LA, ugh c'mon. First LA is about 15 times the size in regard to city population than Atlanta so you cannot compare that one.

Sorry for splitting hairs here but I have to correct you on the matter of population. LA is not 15 times the size of Atlanta by any measure. The most drastic comparison (which I think you may have in mind) is to go by city-proper population, by which measure LA is about 7 times (3.6 mil to .5 mil) Atlanta's size. But I find this basis of measurement problematic because for various reasons Atlanta has been unable to annex or otherwise consolidate its sprawling urban populations the way other cities such as LA, Phoenix, Houston, Dallas, and even Charlotte, have been able to.

For that reason I find that the best measure for comparison is the consolidated statistical metro population which is around 17.5 mil for LA and 5.7 for Atlanta, meaning the ATL is a little over a third the size of the metro LA region. This is a much more accurate and useful basis for comparison in my view and I think it's one that's born out by simple observation of density of cars, people and development in the two places. A city that would be 15 times the size of Atlanta ? I'm not sure there is one. It would have to be about 82 million people large, almost three times the size of metro Tokyo, the world's largest agglomeration. So let's not exaggerate here. :-)

[blondandfun]

My opinion is that Atlanta is a failed city because the part of Atlanta with the greatest potential, downtown, is abandoned during non-business hours, excluding bums and teenage hooligans.

That's my opinion, and I'm quite sure that was the opinion of the tourists because that is what they told me. Maybe they and I were/are wrong, but I'm just telling you what I and others think about your city based on experience downtown. Again, I think it's ignorant to just ignore the downtown of any city, since when somebody visits Atlanta for the first time, they are more likely to stay downtown.

I honestly am dumbfounded how people here can accept the way it is here. I and most everyone else who visits "LA" doesn't actually stay in the city of LA, we stay in Santa Monica or WEHO, which are separate cities, and they actually have something to be proud about as evidenced by the crowds that visit there. Atlanta has nothing to be proud about, and when I talk about I talk about city, not Hotlanta or Decatur, or the suburbs. Everything that is good about Atlanta has been built in the past 5 years, and even after that It's still not that great.

Please don't reply with "There are many great things to do". I'm talking about the city of Atlanta as a city in a physical and cultural sense. Please don't bore me with your talks about the World of Coke and the aquarium in your responses, which I am sure you will anyways because that's what you Atlantans do to bring more people into the region (which you can't handle) so that maybe someday you can build your way out of all your problems.

Las Vegas is trying to build into a city, but we'll just have to see how these new cities turn out, but I'm not very optimistic.

[Saintmarks]

Lack of perfection does not equal failure. By the OPs standards every place on the planet has failed and we might as well bring out the Kool-aid.

So what if downtown isn't teeming with street walkers 24/7? Seeing that Atlanta is developing three major urban centers (midtown and buckhead to be added) and two significant ring cities (perimeter and cumberland) does take away from downtown's ability to be the end all of the area, but most sunbelt cities that have boomed post WWII have similar dynamics. Dallas's downtown has some interesting features, but it isn't that much more exciting than Atlanta's. Houston has thee distinct skylines like Atlanta. I know these similar sized cities better than others, I am sure there are similar examples.

The failure isn't in Atlanta, the failure is in the expectations of the OP. As others have posted, all cities have challenges before them, each is an organic, living, ever changing community. Some have more challenges than others. Detroit has more than most right now (including a winless football team) but it hasn't failed. It, like others will change, will reinvent itself.

But to say that one of the most dynamic cities in America that has arguably been the city with the most consistent growth for four decades running -- to make a prononucement that the city has failed -- is so laughable that the post should have been ignored totally. I only post because other more charitable posters have made some good comments and thought I'd chime in as well.

As for the future, the Greenbelt and adding commuter rail are two of the biggest projects that do need to come into fruition. The leadership of the city needs to return to someone with smarts and the ability to see these things come to pass. Is Sam Massell too old to run again? Would he stand a chance?

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

My opinion is that Atlanta is a failed city because the part of Atlanta with the greatest potential, downtown, is abandoned during non-business hours, excluding bums and teenage hooligans.

Well, I'll give you points for at least hanging in there and trying to be direct. And for at least taking a stab at an interesting argument. I'm actually with you in thinking it's valid to raise the question of whether a city is a failed city or not. I think it's a legitimate and interesting way to look at a city, as with other human projects. That said, I'm disappointed that you're seemingly unable to go beyond banalities, and most of all, that you're limited by a pretty narrow-minded and snobbish view of what a city is (but without having the intellectual tools to really do justice to your own snobbery). But that's OK, you have the right to your opinion.

Oh well, we gave it a shot. Good luck with your exploring and debating.

[DeaconJ]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

My opinion is that Atlanta is a failed city because the part of Atlanta with the greatest potential, downtown, is abandoned during non-business hours, excluding bums and teenage hooligans.

That's my opinion, and I'm quite sure that was the opinion of the tourists because that is what they told me. Maybe they and I were/are wrong, but I'm just telling you what I and others think about your city based on experience downtown. Again, I think it's ignorant to just ignore the downtown of any city, since when somebody visits Atlanta for the first time, they are more likely to stay downtown.

There are more than 30,000 residents of Downtown Atlanta...if you call that "abandoned" then you are more ignorant than I first thought you were. It is a higher population than MOST downtowns across the country...and they don't just live there during non-business hours, and they don't stay inside their homes. This population number doesn't include Castleberry Hill either - it is only the 4 square mile area of Downtown.

You're theory is just plain wrong, so shut up about it. You aren't stating an opinion, you are stating an incorrect fact. Do you understand the difference?

[Georgia]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

My opinion is that Atlanta is a failed city because the part of Atlanta with the greatest potential, downtown, is abandoned during non-business hours, excluding bums and teenage hooligans.

That's my opinion, and I'm quite sure that was the opinion of the tourists because that is what they told me. .

Well Blonde, I always give prop's when justified since I try to base my thought process on logic over emotion. Your quote above IMO is correct, as I find it appauling that thugs and panhandlers run the streets. It's in the heart of the city, Buckhead, and Atlantic Station, which goes from shopping in the daytime to compound at night.

Now, with this said it does not make Atlanta a "failed" city. What Atlanta has, and I'm bound to get hit hard here by the left, is what Atlanta suffers from is failed leadership. Our previous leadership is in prison, followed by the far left Queen of the Lapel Flower, Her majesty Shirley Franklin and her court. Her claim to fame is being the self named "Sewer Queen", but we have to face it. The leadership of this city has failed, not the city itself. As I stated before, many folks want to make Atlanta the jewel and refuse to give up. Many folks in business like Blank strive to keep business and jobs in the city. But Shirley? She would rather allow thugs to run the streets, coddle panhandlers, and take tax funded trips to China and Africa than "love" the city.

If your going to be a Mayor of a major city, the Mayor has to "love" the city. Case in point, Philadelphia. Lived in that area for well over a decade "Go Eagles", Mayor, now Governor Rendell, a Democrat, yes I'm giving prop's to a Dem loves his hometown. He took a bankrupt city nicknamed Killadelphia- The Land of Push You and Shove, to Philly, the city by the Delaware! Businesses came in droves, homes went north in value, you could walk South Street, CC Blvd, Arch, Old Town, etc., without worry. After his two terms we get John Street. A two time Bankrupt, previous felon, running the city. Look at it today. Killadelphia is back! But is Philly a failed city? No. Just failed leadership.

If a city does not do it for you how about a national scale? Is America a failed country? Or has 20 years of the failed Clinton/Bush dynasty failed America? It's all how you choose to look at it.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by Georgia

Well Blonde, I always give prop's when justified since I try to base my thought process on logic over emotion. Your quote above IMO is correct, as I find it appauling that thugs and panhandlers run the streets. It's in the heart of the city, Buckhead, and Atlantic Station, which goes from shopping in the daytime to compound at night.

Now, with this said it does not make Atlanta a "failed" city. What Atlanta has, and I'm bound to get hit hard here by the left, is what Atlanta suffers from is failed leadership. Our previous leadership is in prison, followed by the far left Queen of the Lapel Flower, Her majesty Shirley Franklin and her court. Her claim to fame is being the self named "Sewer Queen", but we have to face it. The leadership of this city has failed, not the city itself. As I stated before, many folks want to make Atlanta the jewel and refuse to give up. Many folks in business like Blank strive to keep business and jobs in the city. But Shirley? She would rather allow thugs to run the streets, coddle panhandlers, and take tax funded trips to China and Africa than "love" the city.

If your going to be a Mayor of a major city, the Mayor has to "love" the city. Case in point, Philadelphia. Lived in that area for well over a decade "Go Eagles", Mayor, now Governor Rendell, a Democrat, yes I'm giving prop's to a Dem loves his hometown. He took a bankrupt city nicknamed Killadelphia- The Land of Push You and Shove, to Philly, the city by the Delaware! Businesses came in droves, homes went north in value, you could walk South Street, CC Blvd, Arch, Old Town, etc., without worry. After his two terms we get John Street. A two time Bankrupt, previous felon, running the city. Look at it today. Killadelphia is back! But is Philly a failed city? No. Just failed leadership.

If a city does not do it for you how about a national scale? Is America a failed country? Or has 20 years of the failed Clinton/Bush dynasty failed America? It's all how you choose to look at it.

You're right about a mayor having to love their city. Oh-so-important.

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by Georgia

If a city does not do it for you how about a national scale? Is America a failed country? Or has 20 years of the failed Clinton/Bush dynasty failed America? It's all how you choose to look at it.

Exactly. I was initially going to try to broaden the debate by bringing in the relevant larger discussion -- which you can see by reading this recent article from The New Republic about the re-Europeanization of American cities, of which Atlanta is a major example (Trading Places) -- but the original poster didn't really seem interested in discussing the topic on that level.

So, you're exactly right in a sense, the real question is ultimately, if Atlanta is a failed city then that will ultimately say something about a failure of American cities as such and have broader political and cultural implications. But, guess that discussion is for another day.

[blondandfun]

I was going to reply to some posts but had to delete them because I sincerely didn't want this to be a fight. I was hoping that people would agree with my OP, but I see that most replies don't agree with a word that I used so I'll leave it at that and I won't return any of your insults.

[johnatl]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

Again, I think it's ignorant to just ignore the downtown of any city, since when somebody visits Atlanta for the first time, they are more likely to stay downtown.

I honestly am dumbfounded how people here can accept the way it is here. I and most everyone else who visits "LA" doesn't actually stay in the city of LA, we stay in Santa Monica or WEHO, which are separate cities, and they actually have something to be proud about as evidenced by the crowds that visit there. Atlanta has nothing to be proud about, and when I talk about I talk about city, not Hotlanta or Decatur, or the suburbs. Everything that is good about Atlanta has been built in the past 5 years, and even after that It's still not that great.

Let me get this straight - it's ignorant to ignore the downtown of any city, which you accuse us of collectively doing, but you brag that you yourself do this very thing when visiting L.A.? Do you not see how hypocritical you are being? You write off downtown Atlanta basically as a hellhole, but you completey avoid downtown L.A. and prefer not to experience it at all? I can tell you that the experience is almost identical, with less to do for tourists in L.A.

Why do you think Buckhead & Midtown have all the hotels, dining and shopping that they do, and adding more? These are our WEHO and Santa Monica. Think about it. And unlike L.A., they are all connected by rail. Right now - not in 2015, again, like L.A.

Sounds to me like you hit town with a huge chip on your shoulder, or are not very well traveled to other American cities - besides L.A.