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.
Also not standard is saying that inner loop Houston has more people than the city of Atlanta and is 50 square miles is also misleading. They are not similar in dimensions or scope and does not account for different development patterns. If the current shape of the city of Atlanta limits was moved east a few miles, the population different would be dramatic as the area just east of the city of Atlanta limits is heavily populated while the same is not true on the west side.
well the same is true for Houston. The east side of the loop is rather empty and the part outside the loop to the west is even denser than within the loop itself. so it is not misleading to pick two standard areas. If you gerry mander the boundaries for ATL the same could probably be done in Houston to get more desirable results. People only choose the loop because it is convenient
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Developed density to me, absolutely.
Have you ever been or spent time in MT ATL, just curious
yep, my cousin leaves close. I spend some time there every year. will be therein November. ATL is my second home, and I have spent sometime in Midtown
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas
Allegedly. However, if it turns that is true (which the facts on the ground do not support), structural infill isn't reliant on people moving in but developers building stuff. There was plenty of that prior to the recession from highrise and rowhouse. Lots of it.
well yeah that is true. ATL had significant structural infill but Houston was no slouch either
the population is not even in the large majority of cities. that is why I don't like people taking land area for more than it really is. It just doesn't tell you much.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,994,819 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
well the same is true for Houston. The east side of the loop is rather empty and the part outside the loop to the west is even denser than within the loop itself. so it is not misleading to pick two standard areas. If you gerry mander the boundaries for ATL the same could probably be done in Houston to get more desirable results. People only choose the loop because it is convenient
That's all I'm really saying. In this "debate" which of the three is more developed, I'm not of the mind that Atlanta is light years ahead of either Houston or Dallas. All three are heavily developed cities in their cores no matter how you slice it. Where Atlanta differs from Houston or Dallas is that Atlanta does have a more vibrant core, more residents in it's "Downtown", much higher density residential developments (and tons of htem) and a mass transit system already in place to support it. Our ducks are in order in a way where any future development, which is already planned with several projects in progress, will push it by default to a different level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
ATL had significant structural infill but Houston was no slouch either
Exactly, which is why when paired with what the Census Bureau says is our population (and combined with the fact that only 64% of respondents sent back their Census forms) it makes zero sense to act like the city of Atlanta only grew by 4000 residents in 10 years. It may have not gotten the 150,000 we were expecting, but that low number does not make sense for anyone who has been even remote familiar with the development and repopulation of certain neighborhoods that were dead as a door knob 10 years ago. It'll all get sorted out with the challenge though. For now we can just go with Atlanta grew by 4000 people between 2000 and 2010 for 'play play'.
That's all I'm really saying. In this "debate" which of the three is more developed, I'm not of the mind that Atlanta is light years ahead of either Houston or Dallas. All three are heavily developed cities in their cores no matter how you slice it. Where Atlanta differs from Houston or Dallas is that Atlanta does have a more vibrant core, more residents in it's "Downtown", much higher density residential developments (and tons of htem) and a mass transit system already in place to support it. Our ducks are in order in a way where any future development, which is already planned with several projects in progress, will push it by default to a different level.
well I know you are not like some of the other ATL posters who make wild claims and I do not disagree with anything you said. I disagreed with the poster who was claiming density stats for ATL in comparison to Houston that just wasn't true.
ATL and Houston have two different development patterns around downtown. Houston goes more fro the townhome, attached housing stock, while ATL goes for more taller housing options that cover less land area.
Quote:
Exactly, which is why when paired with what the Census Bureau says is our population (and combined with the fact that only 64% of respondents sent back their Census forms) it makes zero sense to act like the city of Atlanta only grew by 4000 residents in 10 years. It may have not gotten the 150,000 we were expecting, but that low number does not make sense for anyone who has been even remote familiar with the development and repopulation of certain neighborhoods that were dead as a door knob 10 years ago. It'll all get sorted out with the challenge though. For now we can just go with Atlanta grew by 4000 people between 2000 and 2010 for 'play play'.
I agree, but those sort of arguments could also be applied to Houston. We were also expecting 200K more than what was recorded, and we are putting forth a challenge too. So for now we can just go with Houstons figure for play play. On the east side of Houston a ton of vacant single family homes were torn down and replaced with townhomes etc, and yet the areas are reflecting a loss in population growth instead of a gain. SO it is the same scenario here too.
Where are people getting that Houston isn't densifying its core; Lofts and townhouses are popping up all over the city. I've stated Atlanta's core is the most urban, but its urbanity drops significant once away from the core; whereas with Houston and Dallas you have more consistency. This is why I feel Houston and Dallas have a better chance. The sprawl in Atlanta is more serious than here.
Spade, am telling you, I find myself basically agreeing with almost all you post as well, well except that Cowboys stuff, but outside of that am starting to think you are one smart person
yes, but Houston is vast and the metro and the city have melded together to form a suburban beast that stretches for 70 Miles in each direction.
even with oil prices reaching for the moon people still don't mind living further and further away (speaking solely about Houston here and basing that on how far the burbs are pushing).
Houston is NOT 70 miles in each direction.
The built-up area of Houston east-west is about 60 miles (Just west of Katy to the east side of Baytown), and north-south, it's about 90 miles (Galveston Beach to Conroe). It's not 140 miles across. If you mean that Houston is 70 miles across, each direction, as in East-West & North-South, then that is a bit more realistic.
The built-up area of Houston east-west is about 60 miles (Just west of Katy to the east side of Baytown), and north-south, it's about 90 miles (Galveston Beach to Conroe). It's not 140 miles across. If you mean that Houston is 70 miles across, each direction, as in East-West & North-South, then that is a bit more realistic.
calm down. The part in bold is what I meant
and it is more like 75M east to west from Brookshire to the east Baytown area
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Spade, am telling you, I find myself basically agreeing with almost all you post as well, well except that Cowboys stuff, but outside of that am starting to think you are one smart person
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade
Ha. Lol. The feeling though is mutual, kidphilly especially when it comes to sports.
calm down. The part in bold is what I meant
and it is more like 75M east to west from Brookshire to the east Baytown area
sheesh, get a room already
Back poster! Also believe that neither Spade nor myself fit the surprisingly high demographic on here so we are probably all good. If for some reason he is a actually a she and a smokin hot brunette (well may not be that discriminant on hair color) I might reconsider
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.
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.
