Top 10 walkable, or #1 sprawl? (Atlanta, Dallas: neighborhood, moving to, suburbs)

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

Replace Ansley Park and Historic Midtown? Absolutely not. There is plenty of room for high-density development without taking away from the historic character of the area. Why in the world would you want to see these 19th and early 20th century homes destroyed but not similar ones in the other areas? That doesn't make any sense. They are an important part of the fabric of Atlanta and there is ample room for both.

I highly doubt you will find much support for such a thing.

I totally agree.

The juxtaposition of bucolic Historic Midtown and Ansley Park (and now Home Park) with the skyline of the hyper-urban core is truly remarkable.

[AtlantaIsHot]

Originally Posted by steveklein

Honestly, I would say neither. It definitely isn't #1 sprawl. Houston, Dallas, and my god, Los Angeles are worse. I'd even say Phoenix is worse. Maybe Birmingham too (though it is way, way, way smaller, it is super spread out and the population density is super low).

And though parts of Atlanta are very walkable, the vast majority of the metro area's residents have terrible walkability scores. There is no comparison when you look at Atlanta vs. New York. Now that I think about it, it might be in the top 10 in walkability, but towards the bottom.

Actually, I think it does deserve it's #1 ranking for sprawl. In terms of the amount of space it takes up to house it's population it's way bigger than it has to be. Atlanta covers an enormous amount of land area-it's developed land area is now 2,600 square miles... Larger than Houston, Dallas, Chicago, and approaching New York's size! It's now more than twice the size of Rhode Island. It's gobbling up space at a rate that far exceeds it's population growth. Los Angeles by contrast is actually quite dense. It sprawled in it's early decades but it cannot sprawl much more due to mountains and the ocean. Non-stop infill construction has created the most dense metro area in the nation.

As far as walkability, it's probably overall not too good. Especially in the suburbs as they grew in the automobile age. The other cities' walkability scores are mostly luck and age related. New York and Chicago grew into cities when automobiles didn't exist. Sunbelt cities did not.

[Staysean23]

I really think people missed the point of the whole survey lol

[Ant131531]

Los Angeles, Houston, and Dallas are far denser metro wise than Atlanta is because of the more consistent density. And many of LA's suburbs are walkable.

And to the people saying 'The single family homes make Atlanta unique'. It really doesn't. You don't see tourists clamoring to see Atlanta for it's 20th century single family homes. Every city has this....the more denser city have them farther out.

I guess that's why people aren't clamoring to see SF and NYC...because they have no single family homes a half mile from downtown.

Atlanta really do live in their own world and really think this city is unique.

[Cameron H]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

And to the people saying 'The single family homes make Atlanta unique'. It really doesn't.

I wouldn't say Atlanta's historic in-town residential neighborhoods are unique (they aren't), but they're beautiful and contribute greatly to the city's character and appeal.

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

part of that, of course, is bad, but i think having that dichotomy in development keeps atlanta's tree canopy intact, when if we had miles and miles of 'dense sprawl' (which is not really all that walkable anyway), atlanta wouldn't have nearly the amount of forested areas it does. it keeps the urban areas close to nature.

Yeah, I don't get the people who go on and on about dense sprawl like it's a good thing. It's like arguing which is better: a long hard turd or diarrhea. Both are still ****.

Originally Posted by bryantm3

i think the ideal would be to build up our primary urban core and buckhead, establish other walkable urban cores (perimeter, cumberland, alpharetta, marietta, etc.), connect them all by transit, and all the areas in between concentrate on keeping the tree canopy intact.

that way you can choose to live in the city or the suburbs, and either way, you're not far from the other.

Isn't this the setup we already have in Fulton and Dekalb county?

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

I guess that's why people aren't clamoring to see SF and NYC...because they have no single family homes a half mile from downtown.

You're kidding, right? They may not have a lawn, as well as being attached, but there are plenty of single family homes in and around the downtowns of both of those cities.

Having single family homes in a district doesn't limit density at all. The best example I can think of the Makati district in Manila. It has a density 5 times that of Manhattan (with half the population), while having a setup very similar to Midtown (though on the ground it's more like a hyper version of the Lenox area in Buckhead) with dozens of skyscrapers in it's center and surrounded by mid-20th century single family homes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ma...066ed57830cace

Overall, I think people really confuse how much of a roll density provides in making a place walkable. Of course, the most walkable neighborhoods are usually (but not always) quite dense residential, but a dense area (more often than people think) isn't by default very walkable. Take my example of Makati above. It's one of the densest areas on the entire planet (and right next door to the densest city on the planet), yet it's one of the least walkable places ever.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

Replace Ansley Park and Historic Midtown? Absolutely not. There is plenty of room for high-density development without taking away from the historic character of the area. Why in the world would you want to see these 19th and early 20th century homes destroyed but not similar ones in the other areas? That doesn't make any sense. They are an important part of the fabric of Atlanta and there is ample room for both.

I highly doubt you will find much support for such a thing.

Except that I wasn't talking about either area. I was referring to some of the random SFR along 11th, 12th, and 13th streets between Juniper and Piedmont that already exist among midrise and highrise apartment and condo buildings; that area should continue to transition into a higher density residential area. I'm not talking about wiping out entire neighborhoods of SFR like Ansley and the historic Midtown district.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

You're kidding, right? They may not have a lawn, as well as being attached, but there are plenty of single family homes in and around the downtowns of both of those cities.

Having single family homes in a district doesn't limit density at all. The best example I can think of the Makati district in Manila. It has a density 5 times that of Manhattan (with half the population), while having a setup very similar to Midtown (though on the ground it's more like a hyper version of the Lenox area in Buckhead) with dozens of skyscrapers in it's center and surrounded by mid-20th century single family homes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ma...066ed57830cace

Overall, I think people really confuse how much of a roll density provides in making a place walkable. Of course, the most walkable neighborhoods are usually (but not always) quite dense residential, but a dense area (more often than people think) isn't by default very walkable. Take my example of Makati above. It's one of the densest areas on the entire planet (and right next door to the densest city on the planet), yet it's one of the least walkable places ever.

I'm talking detached single family homes. NYC or SF does not have this around their downtown cores. They may have rowhouses(and the rowhouses near the downtowns are generally multi-unit anyways), but they still aren't your typical single family home you see near midtown. Let's be real here. SF's densities near downtown reach up to 90k ppsm and over 120k ppsm in Manhattan.

Atlanta barely has census tracts above 25k ppsm density.

[AnsleyPark]

Density Shmensity.