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.
Truth be told Atlanta gets a lot of love in Texas. As much as some of y'all want us to hate you...sorry, we just don't. Likewise, I've met plenty of Atlantans who have moved out here and show nothing but love. It's only a few people who are invested in this fake rivalry.
With that said, Migos saved y'all's reputation big time.
Even my mama likes the song "T-Shirt"
And yeah, despite the interstate rivalry between the posters from Texas cities and the Atlanta posters on this forum, that's definitely not the case in real life.
Houston is very random compare to Atlanta and Dallas, in Houston you find like a colonial revival. a McManison and Some multi unit with garages on the same street.
Houston actually does have victorian homes and etc but Houston wouldn't have a large contunium like Inman Park or Grant Park. This partly because Atlanta was bigger in late victorian era but another huge factor Houston culture in general is more of anything goes.
Atlanta does have some homes that seem out of place, but for most part Atlanta is nearly opposite A lot of Atlanta core neighborhoods are historic districts
Atlanta oldest neighborhoods Sweet Aurburn, Inman Park, West End, Cabbagetown and etc are predominately Victorian with I minorty of craftsman, and bungalows, Atlanta 1
In case you was thinking it's because oh it's because Houston pics had more multi units... no... These are example of older Atlanta multi units Atlanta
The only places that are a little random in Atlanta is part of Historic midtown, Old forth ward.
This is cause the Midtown CBD is over flowing against the Historic neighborhood. And you get some multi units looking more modern mixed with older multi units and newer multi units meant to fit and look tradition.
Old forth ward is not register as a national Historic district this is probably cause of the Atlanta fire of 1917, and the construction of Freedom Parkway.
Atlantic station is meant look like mill, because it replaced a mill.
West Midtown Atlanta area in general has an industrial pass so some developments are reflecting that past.
My point is Atlanta is doing more to keep the traditional feel verse Houston that more anything goes. neither is bad. Houston beimg random with zoning and architecture is something unique to Houston. And While Atlanta having so many historic districts contradicts what a lot of people think of sunbelt cities.
You Houston pictures are pretty much all 4th Ward which 30 years ago was a primarily row houses dating back to the 1870s before the city finally rebuilt and shrunk a public housing unit, Allen Parkway Village (once the home of Kenny Rogers-its been around that long) that was holding back development in the area. It has redeveloped in an eclectic manner. Most Houston neighborhoods are pretty consistent in their character, even ones like West University and Bellaire which have massively redeveloped as well. Not as consistent as Atlanta, but you still might see an ultramodern house in the midst of 1930s brick cottages in Virginia Highlands.
Atlanta does maintain more and has older stock, but Houston has its large mass of Victorians in the Heights (notably where they have "Lights in the Heights" Lights in the Heights 2016 Route | 365 Houston). IMO, Atlanta would do well to replace its mass of really ugly 60s-70s ranch houses that so permeate the area. Everything old is not good.
I flew into Houston a couple of years ago to get my Chinese Visa from the consulate there. Keeping in mind I only spent a couple of hours there and I am merely speaking on Houstons's skyline and first impressions......I found it to be bland. Nothing made me think I've got to spend more time here.That is completely the opposite reaction I've had in the other major Texas cities I've visited. Not saying anything bad about the city itself or its people, because I honestly didn't spend enough time there to get a true feeling for it. Just also haven't felt the need to go back as a traveler. Maybe I'm missing out and Houston is more like the woman with a nicer/great attitude that makes her more attractive?
And replace them with what, $700k+ modern farmhouses? (and in effect limit those able to purchase a single-family home ITP to $200k/year earners)
Well that's an issue.
But I know we had a problem finding a house here. It was either small, bad schools, really expensive or required a lot of maintenance & updating, which is hard for dual earner families with kids. There just doesn't seem to have been much built ITP from 1970-2010 other than condos/townhomes.
Seems to have been more built the last 6 or 7 years than there was for a long, long time ITP.
You Houston pictures are pretty much all 4th Ward which 30 years ago was a primarily row houses dating back to the 1870s before the city finally rebuilt and shrunk a public housing unit, Allen Parkway Village (once the home of Kenny Rogers-its been around that long) that was holding back development in the area. It has redeveloped in an eclectic manner. Most Houston neighborhoods are pretty consistent in their character, even ones like West University and Bellaire which have massively redeveloped as well. Not as consistent as Atlanta, but you still might see an ultramodern house in the midst of 1930s brick cottages in Virginia Highlands.
Atlanta does maintain more and has older stock, but Houston has its large mass of Victorians in the Heights (notably where they have "Lights in the Heights" Lights in the Heights 2016 Route | 365 Houston). IMO, Atlanta would do well to replace its mass of really ugly 60s-70s ranch houses that so permeate the area. Everything old is not good.
I said "Houston actually does have victorian homes and etc but Houston wouldn't have a large contunium like Inman Park or Grant Park. This partly because Atlanta was bigger in late victorian era but another huge factor Houston culture in general is more of anything goes."
I posted that area because it's denser development, I only posted the inner neighborhoods of both cities.
I did not post ranch era develop in nor city...
Houston is not a rowhouse city.... part of Houston 4th ward has a historic district built by ex slaves, they commonly built shot gun developments this was common in the south, Atlanta has a few area like this in several neighborhoods. Which brings me to my next point
I wasn't going to post the hood or blighted areas in nor city.
This mean I avoided 3rd ward Houston like I did Vine city and etc in Atlanta.
This means I went to the western end in 4th ward Houston to the neartown neighborhoods like Hyde Park, Montrose. which are better representation of Houston infilling much like Atlanta eastern neighborhoods.
My point wasn't to dis Houston rather I compliment both cities, Houston randomness is something that makes Houston Houston. No other Sunbelt city is a random as Houston.
So while Atlanta stick out for being one of the oldest sunbelt cities, Houston also has it's own reasons for being unique.
Sorry Bub, but 'Stagnated' cities don't have construction cranes from one end of town to the other.
'Stagnated' cities also don't churn out almost 100,000 new jobs and attract over 90,000 new residents in the past year.
And I don't really care what you say, but Seattle's traffic is MUCH worse than Atlanta's. The 5, the 405 and the bridges across the Lake are virtually gridlocked almost all day.
Again, buh-bye.
Yeah but dude what I am stating is that, I can go to DFW / Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego..and see the same kind of growth explosions...It's not just Atlanta thats booming. Its good that Atlanta is building but whats bad is that they're not doing anything to accomidate for the influx of people while these other cities are...Thats what I am inferring by staginating. What drives businesses (and even the movie industry) to Atlanta is that the taxes are low, the scenery is pretty nice compared to several parts of the west.
By saying "I don't care what you say Seattle has worse traffic than Atlanta" - I have two things to say against that..
#1 I-85 between GA-316 to downtown is a parking lot almost every weekday - that would be the equivalent of Federal Way to Downtown Seattle where as I-5 does not get bad until you get about 3 miles past I-405. - The difference is...there's more alternative routes in Atlanta than there are in Seattle.
#2 this statement shows partialism, which is unfair for either city, because it shows that you're not willing to go by factual evidence but by what you "feel" instead of whats proven and true...and you're not a factual source.
As for I-5 and I-405 - The south side of I-405 (between Northcenter and Bellevue) can be a bit of a pain. Im not going to lie on that. It's 3 lanes each way with one 2 of them designed for general purpose and 1 HOV.. I typically left at about 5am to avoid that on my commute to Bothell. I-5 itself isn't really much better or worse than I-75/85 - the bridges are just that..there's no way to improve them, it's literally a geographical bottleneck.. Driving in Seattle itself..isn't pleasant and Atlanta wins in terms of having more alternative routes...but the numbers still remain that Atlanta placed 9th and Seattle is at 23...This MAY have alot to due with the fact that alot more people use Mass Transit in Seattle..and Atlanta DOES have more alternative routes than Seattle to reach certain areas (especially if traveling east west..) but again the main reason why the roads suck in Seattle is literally because it's impossible to improve them - there's too many geographic restrictions - which is also the reason I-405 is limited to 3 lanes each way for about 7 - 8 miles... Now Im not saying Atlanta needs to widen everything to 20 lanes each way no..but what I am saying is.. there's no reason this city should be on the first page of the most congested cities in the world list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhammaster
Dude, you have some serious issues showing here. Like, look at all this.
You came into a discussion that was about comparing Houston to Atlanta and felt so enraged that people like living in Atlanta and have positive things to say about it that you felt the need to antagonize and debate people on the overall merit with rage and hate filled essays using any city and metric you can find. That's not normal man.
I should reiterate then. Atlanta is a fair city for what it is and what its intended for,however; I do often feel that people's opinions of it are a bit exaggerated, and this is coming from having seen other cities like Houston, DFW, Los Angeles, San Diego, Pheonix, Denver, Salt Lake City, and so forth. Seattle was only brought into the discussion to emphasize how lacking the transit system in Atlanta is. (Seattle is a smaller city and has about 3 times the mass transit coverage than the Atlanta metro has)... Seattle in ITSELF is not a good comparison to Atlanta - Seattle is smaller, has much more geographical restrictions, is a port city, has a higher cost of living and isn't founded on the same economy.
The thing that highly aggitates me about Atlanta is that Atlanta is highly unorganized unplanned urban explosion. Houston, DFW, and several other sunbelt cities did account for the same growth. Houston 's population in itself is larger than Atlanta's by about 2 - 3 million yet Atlanta ranks higher in the average hours spent per vehicle. I'm not trying to "debunk" your view of Atlanta. I am trying to say that it really seems like alot of people don't have a realistic view of it in the grand scheme of things in comparison to several other cities in this nation.
Edit: I have to state one other thing though, what good is debating any city against any city if no factual information is going to be used? Who's "opinion" would really be "real" if the only opinion you want to hear is how good Atlanta is? instead of whats based on facts? How can that be any comparison to any city?
Last edited by Need4Camaro; 05-17-2017 at 12:38 AM..
Yeah but dude what I am stating is that, I can go to DFW / Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego..and see the same kind of growth explosions...It's not just Atlanta thats booming. Its good that Atlanta is building but whats bad is that they're not doing anything to accomidate for the influx of people while these other cities are...Thats what I am inferring by staginating. What drives businesses (and even the movie industry) to Atlanta is that the taxes are low, the scenery is pretty nice compared to several parts of the west.
By saying "I don't care what you say Seattle has worse traffic than Atlanta" - I have two things to say against that..
#1 I-85 between GA-316 to downtown is a parking lot almost every weekday - that would be the equivalent of Federal Way to Downtown Seattle where as I-5 does not get bad until you get about 3 miles past I-405. - The difference is...there's more alternative routes in Atlanta than there are in Seattle.
#2 this statement shows partialism, which is unfair for either city, because it shows that you're not willing to go by factual evidence but by what you "feel" instead of whats proven and true...and you're not a factual source.
As for I-5 and I-405 - The south side of I-405 (between Northcenter and Bellevue) can be a bit of a pain. Im not going to lie on that. It's 3 lanes each way with one 2 of them designed for general purpose and 1 HOV.. I typically left at about 5am to avoid that on my commute to Bothell. I-5 itself isn't really much better or worse than I-75/85 - the bridges are just that..there's no way to improve them, it's literally a geographical bottleneck.. Driving in Seattle itself..isn't pleasant and Atlanta wins in terms of having more alternative routes...but the numbers still remain that Atlanta placed 9th and Seattle is at 23...This MAY have alot to due with the fact that alot more people use Mass Transit in Seattle..and Atlanta DOES have more alternative routes than Seattle to reach certain areas (especially if traveling east west..) but again the main reason why the roads suck in Seattle is literally because it's impossible to improve them - there's too many geographic restrictions - which is also the reason I-405 is limited to 3 lanes each way for about 7 - 8 miles... Now Im not saying Atlanta needs to widen everything to 20 lanes each way no..but what I am saying is.. there's no reason this city should be on the first page of the most congested cities in the world list.
I should reiterate then. Atlanta is a fair city for what it is and what its intended for,however; I do often feel that people's opinions of it are a bit exaggerated, and this is coming from having seen other cities like Houston, DFW, Los Angeles, San Diego, Pheonix, Denver, Salt Lake City, and so forth. Seattle was only brought into the discussion to emphasize how lacking the transit system in Atlanta is. (Seattle is a smaller city and has about 3 times the mass transit coverage than the Atlanta metro has)... Seattle in ITSELF is not a good comparison to Atlanta - Seattle is smaller, has much more geographical restrictions, is a port city, has a higher cost of living and isn't founded on the same economy.
The thing that highly aggitates me about Atlanta is that Atlanta is highly unorganized unplanned urban explosion. Houston, DFW, and several other sunbelt cities did account for the same growth. Houston 's population in itself is larger than Atlanta's by about 2 - 3 million yet Atlanta ranks higher in the average hours spent per vehicle. I'm not trying to "debunk" your view of Atlanta. I am trying to say that it really seems like alot of people don't have a realistic view of it in the grand scheme of things in comparison to several other cities in this nation.
Edit: I have to state one other thing though, what good is debating any city against any city if no factual information is going to be used? Who's "opinion" would really be "real" if the only opinion you want to hear is how good Atlanta is? instead of whats based on facts? How can that be any comparison to any city?
I will give you this......you make a good point regarding the expansion of Seattles light rail and light rail in general. I've tried to make this point to someone in this forum before and all it really came down to in the end is that Marta is heavy rail therefore it automatically trumps any light rail regardless of coverage. Yes Marta is heavy rail but it's limited in its coverage. Marta has great potential if the region would get behind it! Atlanta and the region have not expanded the system since the early 2000's while these much smaller cities such as Seattle, Salt Lake City and Minneapolis may be using light rail however they are doing it in a matter where the coverage and expansion trumps Marta in that respect. The only true way to get people to start using transit is to get people where they want to go and efficiently. This point seemed to be lost on this other individual and I'm certainly not an Atlanta hater. Just someone who has been a couple of places in this world and offered an opinion based on my experience.
And I also agree that the region has no long term plan regarding the additional 3 million people
Expected to live here by 2040. The Texas cities have done a better job in those terms.
IMO, Atlanta would do well to replace its mass of really ugly 60s-70s ranch houses that so permeate the area. Everything old is not good
What? There are a lot of great homes from that era.
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.
