High Rises in East Point? (Atlanta, College Park: apartment, neighborhood, taxes)

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

It just doesn't make sense. Why go back to the same silly ideas such as developing in spread out areas of the metro? Why not focus attention in areas that still have massive parking lots everywhere, especially in Midtown? Wouldn't make sense. This is where the criticism comes in about southern cities just being spread out. I'd rather all development be concentrated in areas in or immediately around the core so that a healthy core can be established....who cares about another office park in East Point. I want Midtown to become the next River North or Streeterville.

That's the point...East Point IS "immediately around the core". It sounds like you just aren't very familiar with the location. I lived there for many years and have had to explain to people exactly where it is, so I've been through this same discussion many times. It's much closer to downtown than you think.

[emcee squared]

Originally Posted by mattee01

But consider that it is cheaper to develop here and you are closest to the airport and you have a lot more options for where. And how to develop as well as many different transportation options (camp creek, 285, 85, langford pkwy, marta or marta rail)

True. I think it would be conditional on the type of development, if any were to arise. I can see hotels or retail around the convention center area on Camp Creek in the future or on the east side of the airport, but high-rise living I can't picture. Who knows, though, a whole employment center may boom around the airport. I could be totally wrong. Also, I'm curious what the current zoning is of the land in question.

[Ant131531]

No, East point in not the core of Atlanta. Midtown and Downtown would be considered the urban core of Atlanta and then a more loose term would be anything inside of the beltline. East Point isn't even in Atlanta. How can it be considered the urban core of Atlanta?!!? I'm talking neighborhoods like Inman Park, O4W, etc.

Whatever. If you all just want an incomplete core and more scattered suburban high rise districts like Perimiter, Cumberland, and Buckhead in different parts of the city, be my guest. This is why the urban living here will never be taken seriously. Chicago and San Francisco might only have 1 high rise district, but it's better then 2-3 of the highrise districts combined in Atlanta.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

No, East point in not the core of Atlanta. Midtown and Downtown would be considered the urban core of Atlanta and then a more loose term would be anything inside of the beltline.

For the last century the urban core of Atlanta has been the Peachtree spine from downtown to Buckhead, and the residential areas to each side.

These days there's a good argument that it extends to Perimeter on the north and the airport on the south. I'd personally be inclined to include East Point as well.

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

No, East point in not the core of Atlanta. Midtown and Downtown would be considered the urban core of Atlanta and then a more loose term would be anything inside of the beltline. East Point isn't even in Atlanta. How can it be considered the urban core of Atlanta?!!? I'm talking neighborhoods like Inman Park, O4W, etc.

Whatever. If you all just want an incomplete core and more scattered suburban high rise districts like Perimiter, Cumberland, and Buckhead in different parts of the city, be my guest. This is why the urban living here will never be taken seriously. Chicago and San Francisco might only have 1 high rise district, but it's better then 2-3 of the highrise districts combined in Atlanta.

Okay...am I typing in English? I'm pretty I said East Point is "immediately around the core", not IN the core. I'm not sure where you read that. I just think you aren't familiar with East Point at all and are still talking as if you are. Do you even know where it is located? 2 exits south of I-20, then 2 exits on Langford. Takes about 5 minutes. It is VERY close to downtown without actually living in it.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by arjay57

For the last century the urban core of Atlanta has been the Peachtree spine from downtown to Buckhead, and the residential areas to each side.

These days there's a good argument that it extends to Perimeter on the north and the airport on the south. I'd personally be inclined to include East Point as well.

The heart of the city has always been Downtown and now Midtown is included in there. That is the financial, cultural heart of Atlanta. This is where you find the highest intensity of urbanity which is why it's considered the urban core of Atlanta. Immediately around the core to me means neighborhoods within 2 miles of the heart of Atlanta. East Point therefore is not considered immediately around the core. It's at least 5-6 miles away and jumps into suburbs before going to the little tiny, urban district of East Point. Laughable if anyone considers this immediately around the core. 5-6 miles isn't around the core.

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

Okay...am I typing in English? I'm pretty I said East Point is "immediately around the core", not IN the core. I'm not sure where you read that. I just think you aren't familiar with East Point at all and are still talking as if you are. Do you even know where it is located? 2 exits south of I-20, then 2 exits on Langford. Takes about 5 minutes. It is VERY close to downtown without actually living in it.

Read above.5-6 miles from Downtown isn't 'immediately' around the core. If you can't walk to it from Midtown or Downtown, it isn't immediately around the core.

For example, Sf's core would simply be downtown SF. Immediately around that core would be neighborhoods like Mission District or Japtown.

Atlanta's core may be larger in area, but nowhere near as built up as SF's core.

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

The heart of the city has always been Downtown and now Midtown is included in there. That is the financial, cultural heart of Atlanta. This is where you find the highest intensity of urbanity which is why it's considered the urban core of Atlanta. Immediately around the core to me means neighborhoods within 2 miles of the heart of Atlanta. East Point therefore is not considered immediately around the core. It's at least 5-6 miles away and jumps into suburbs before going to the little tiny, urban district of East Point. Laughable if anyone considers this immediately around the core. 5-6 miles isn't around the core.




Read above.5-6 miles from Downtown isn't 'immediately' around the core. If you can't walk to it from Midtown or Downtown, it isn't immediately around the core.

For example, Sf's core would simply be downtown SF. Immediately around that core would be neighborhoods like Mission District or Japtown.

Atlanta's core may be larger in area, but nowhere near as built up as SF's core.

Well...I guess we disagree, but the problem is that you don't know much about East Point or it's location, so I'll just leave it at that. Carry on.

[mattee01]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

No, East point in not the core of Atlanta. Midtown and Downtown would be considered the urban core of Atlanta and then a more loose term would be anything inside of the beltline. East Point isn't even in Atlanta. How can it be considered the urban core of Atlanta?!!? I'm talking neighborhoods like Inman Park, O4W, etc.

Whatever. If you all just want an incomplete core and more scattered suburban high rise districts like Perimiter, Cumberland, and Buckhead in different parts of the city, be my guest. This is why the urban living here will never be taken seriously. Chicago and San Francisco might only have 1 high rise district, but it's better then 2-3 of the highrise districts combined in Atlanta.

Well the good thing about developing areas like Buckhead and Sandy Springs, and hopefully East Point and College Park, is that you can get all the benefits of urban and suburban combined without sacrificing much. Being able to have rail, bus, and. One day street cars to have walkability to high or midrises and also big box stores/strip malls. Having the option to drive, but don't have to. Having an areas like the market place combined with an area along peachtree at north ave.

[Ant131531]

The point is East Point isn't a conductive location to develop. Your return on investment simply would't be high enough...there's no incentive to build in East Point when Midtown rents are the highest at the moment and is transforming into a vibrant, ultra-dense(by ATL standards) urban high rise district similar to River North or Streetville in Chicago.

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

The point is East Point isn't a conductive location to develop. Your return on investment simply would't be high enough...there's no incentive to build in East Point when Midtown rents are the highest at the moment and is transforming into a vibrant, ultra-dense(by ATL standards) urban high rise district similar to River North or Streetville in Chicago.

ant, you *just* said this:

Why would someone want to build urban developments in East Point? That's far away from the urban core...Developers would much rather develop in already established urban areas such as Midtown, West Midtown, or Buckhead.

east point is the SAME DISTANCE from downtown as buckhead is, and in addition is also the SAME DISTANCE from downtown as decatur is. you're pulling out this false dichotomy that basically goes like "either we build high rises in downtown and midtown and fill the areas out, or we build high rises in east point and promote suburban development." east point isn't really a suburb first of all, and second of all, we're talking about the possibility, way down the road, of the urban core extending southward to east point, just like the urban core extends northward to buckhead today.

nobody's talking about building office parks in the suburbs or all this other crap that you've come up with, that has nothing to do with the conversation.

what we're talking about is— the urban core extended north to buckhead in the last 30 years. is it possible that the urban core will one day extend down to east point also? this doesn't have anything to do with suburban development. manhattan's urban core is 10 miles long. will our urban core extend southward like that?