Atlanta vs Houston vs Dallas, Which City will be more urban at the end of the decade? (best, state)
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.
Atlanta's downtown/Midtown/and adjacent areas like Reynoldstown and Cabbagetown likely has a higher density than Houston. Houston's inner loop outside of the Downtown/Midtown/East End and other adjacent areas has a higher density than Atlanta. Not necessarily suburban Houston. But still part of "city" of Houston. Basically, one mile from each respective cores. Atlanta density falls off a cliff at least going west and north to a smaller extent. Houston is consistent from its core. This is why Houston has a higher density in its 97 sq mile inner loop than Atlanta does. Dallas is like a combination of Atlanta and Houston when it comes to this.
I bet if Atlanta was only about 45 sq miles, the density could be around 8,000 ppsm.
BTW, about that tunnel thing for Houston. Yes, it is responsible for killing street life in downtown. Which is why you have some people wanting to kill the tunnels. Same thing with Dallas. But that heat though.
There are certainly dead pockets before you get to higher density agian. Such as the area on Northside Drive from Downtown but we are talking not even a half a mile before you get to more density near Georgia Tech and then Bankhead.
Definitely not a mile where there is just nothing.
As I stated earlier Atlanta inner suburbs are also urbanizing fast. Brookhaven is a relative new city whose popularity is making its density rise very quickly.
Doraville is building a huge development on an old GM plant,
I guess what I think and could be wrong,Atlanta has more urban type areas that can easily be walkable and that seems to be where much of this new redevelopment is heading.
Expanding on something already there or was once more urban
That mile you speak of is filling in quite a bit.
I drove going down on 14th Street towards Northside Drive and there is actually a skyline in Westside Atlanta towering over Northside Drive. If I wasnt driving I woould have taken a picture but I swear a year ago there was only one maybe two buildings over 10 stories.Now I see several cranes of midrise buildings rising in an area that has become a major draw for milennials .All this in an area that was mainly industrial 10 years ago
What I said and stand by is that Houston has caught up by a lot in the last 20 years. Almost light years from what it was.
Atlanta problem has been after 7om its been somewhat dead but its always had a very robust tourist,business and a much higher downtown population. Its not consistent but its more than anything downton Houston comes to
Atlanta downtown population has'nt grown much in years at all until recently and its good but still drags behind Midtown and Buckhead.
Houston downtown population is considerably less than downtown Atlanta.No its not like NYC but its a noticeable and significant difference back then than today. From what I found Houstons Dowton has population of around 10,000 with a population density over 4000
Atlanta is over 26,000 with a population density of over 6700 per sq.
Downtown LA is around 8000 per sq mi for comparison.
Had I said LA by far was more urban based on this ,no one would question it but as you see its roughly the same amount distance between LA and Atlanta as Atlanta is from Houston.
Moderator cut: link removed, competitor site
I think Houston's DT population numbers includes or used to include a prison or county jail that bumped the numbers up a lot. I'm not sure if that's still the case.
There's always a decently high number quoted for Atlanta's DT population, but I'd be interested to see what geographic boundaries that number is quoted for. It seems like it would have to jump the freeway to other neighborhoods to be that high. There's just not THAT much more housing in DT ATL compared with Houston or Dallas.
Atlanta's downtown/Midtown/and adjacent areas like Reynoldstown and Cabbagetown likely has a higher density than Houston. Houston's inner loop outside of the Downtown/Midtown/East End and other adjacent areas has a higher density than Atlanta. Not necessarily suburban Houston. But still part of "city" of Houston. Basically, one mile from each respective cores. Atlanta density falls off a cliff at least going west and north to a smaller extent. Houston is consistent from its core. This is why Houston has a higher density in its 97 sq mile inner loop than Atlanta does. Dallas is like a combination of Atlanta and Houston when it comes to this.
Moderator cut: link removed, competitor site
On the second drop box that says "by State," click it to change it to "census tract" and then you can view all three of these cities as of 2017. Houston's highest density census tract is over 59,000 people per square mile in the southwest (Census Tract #4214.02). Though it's located outside of the Loop. A lot of the Inner Loop west of its downtown is now getting over the 10,000 people per square mile threshold as well. Which means that a good amount of infill has been present inside the Inner Loop.
Dallas' highest census tract tops out at over 39,000 people per square mile (Census Tract #192.12). Besides Houston's highest tract, Dallas seems nearly even with Houston, just slightly less in the number of census tracts above 10,000 people per square mile but the difference seems negligible. It does seem a bit more scattered throughout the core. I think it may be the decentralized nature of the Metroplex in play but going from downtown it has an apparent spinal column of density going north.
Atlanta has a clustering of what looks like eight census tracts around Midtown and then has some more tracts above 10,000 people per square mile in its northern direction. With Atlanta, tying those density clusters together with strings of high density tracts or upper middle density tracts would go a long way. Actually all three of these cities could use more work in that regard. All three need to up their density game too.
Dallas and Atlanta tend to favor the northern direction, whereas Houston likes to go west with its density.
All 3 of these cities are similar. None of them are a bastion of urbanity. They just weren't built that way.
I think the common thread is that they are all working to become more urban. This is also happening at about the same pace.
Did you know that it is mostly the same developers who are developing all 3 cities??? The same builders, same architects, same developers, same franchises, same home builders etc.etc. if you want to split hairs then think of this. It's all drama.
Downtown Dallas is a mess, the whole downtown area is blocked in by freeways and a river bed. It has way too much park land. Street level parking lots take up too much space.
They screwed up downtown Dallas so bad that they had to just abandon downtown and start over again on the other side of the freeway and call it Uptown. Ya, downtown had such a bad reputation that they even had to change the name of the new downtown and call it "Uptown". Why didnt they call it Midtown Dallas?
All 3 of these cities are similar. None of them are a bastion of urbanity. They just weren't built that way.
I think the common thread is that they are all working to become more urban. This is also happening at about the same pace.
Did you know that it is mostly the same developers who are developing all 3 cities??? The same builders, same architects, same developers, same franchises, same home builders etc.etc. if you want to split hairs then think of this. It's all drama.
Downtown Dallas is a mess, the whole downtown area is blocked in by freeways and a river bed. It has way too much park land. Street level parking lots take up too much space.
They screwed up downtown Dallas so bad that they had to just abandon downtown and start over again on the other side of the freeway and call it Uptown. Ya, downtown had such a bad reputation that they even had to change the name of the new downtown and call it "Uptown". Why didnt they call it Midtown Dallas?
All 3 of these cities are similar. None of them are a bastion of urbanity. They just weren't built that way.
I think the common thread is that they are all working to become more urban. This is also happening at about the same pace.
Did you know that it is mostly the same developers who are developing all 3 cities??? The same builders, same architects, same developers, same franchises, same home builders etc.etc. if you want to split hairs then think of this. It's all drama.
Downtown Dallas is a mess, the whole downtown area is blocked in by freeways and a river bed. It has way too much park land. Street level parking lots take up too much space.
They screwed up downtown Dallas so bad that they had to just abandon downtown and start over again on the other side of the freeway and call it Uptown. Ya, downtown had such a bad reputation that they even had to change the name of the new downtown and call it "Uptown". Why didnt they call it Midtown Dallas?
It's a mess today, that'll lead to great opportunities tomorrow. Sure, we have a lot of parking lots but this will one day be replaced with pedestrian-friendly developments. Dallas has some serious potential as it builds up adjacent parts of the CBD and continues to reinvent its identity.
I've said this before, Dallas' growth is extremely impressive, given the immense regional competition and car-oriented nature.
Atlanta has so much more land even it its core still yet or in the process to be developed.
Even the Atlanta University Tract is over 10,000 per sq.
Campbelton Rd is already over 7,000 sq mi. Its a few miles on the South which is an area with far less development than anywhere on the bustling North.
Any existing land as Atlanta has already shown can be redeveloped. A bulldozer is all thats needed
You are simply not accurate in what you think is going on.
I could be wrong but from what I see from data sets Atlanta is more urban overall.At least jouding by the number of neighborhoods in the each city. Houston appears to be more urban in its suburbs by a significant margin as Atlanta is in the city course.How that is worded "by far" or "significant margin",its all the same to me.
These are The Top 50 Neighborhoods ranked with their density numbers
Atlanta VS Houston
1@1k / 3@1k
8@2k+ / 8@2k+
8@3k+ / 5@3k+
9@4k+ / 8@4k+
12@5k+ / 10@5k
2@6k+ / 6@6k+
6@7k+ / 4@7k+
1@8k+ / 4@8k+
3@10-11+ / 1@15k+
26 neighborhoods over 5000 in Houston vs 24 in Atlanta .However Atlanta has a significant more number of neighborhoods with higher densities overall.
Buckhead in its commercial district has urbanized very quickly. Especially around Buckhead Village. Have you been there in the last 5-10 years?
They tore down several blocks to build the Buckhead Atlanta development which has spurred continuous walkable urban development from Peachtree St down Pharr Rd and side streets of several blocks and in between to Piedmont Rd towards where those luxury car dealerships are.
Its not corridors.Its complete blocks.
Block by block and one by one those low destiny buildings are disappearing.
Even around the Phipps Plaza,its has been redevelop and integrated with a hotel,high rise apartments and condos surrounding it.
The area around the malls are the least urban of course but that doesnt mean they arent urban and getting more urban.
That entire area that circles Phipps heading towards 400 ramps is very dense with apartments , condos,retail and connected by PATH 400
soon as you just go a few blocks South on Peachtree or go
Now as you stated ,Houston is way more urban out of its core but cores are very important.
It could the areas father from the core are denser but the same is happening in Atlanta's inner suburban areas. Chamblee_Doravile,Dunwoddy, Vinings/Smyrna,Decatur,Brookhaven etc on a level not as high as Houston but as fast.
There simply isnt a such thing as when someone made the statement: "Atlanta is focusing more on its core".
First of all,thats suggesting Atlanta is monolithic. Those suburban areas are doing everything they can to create urban environments by doing large scale projects and retrofitting existing areas just like in the city.
Studies show its working.I posted in anther thread that showed how much Atlanta suburbs were urbanizing faster and are now more urban compared to many different cities.Even compared to some up North
Side note.
Atlanta is where I spend most of my time but I live in different cities for work reasons who lives between Philly,South Georgia and Atlanta
I was with a Slovakian visitor who came to Atlanta for 2 weeks to take medical exams but he just moved to Philly for a job in a hospital.(it was by chance I met him in Atlanta)
He was in Houston for a conference and his exact words to me was:
"Houston streets were very dead".I asked really? When was this? He answered "it was 11 am during a weekday."
he was there for a few days
We spent ONE day around in the city of Atlanta with me riding around in my convertible, but had not ventured past downtown area the entire 2 weeks he was in Atlanta until we hung out and saw the city.
He thought the downtown was much more livelier than Houston but had no idea,the city was bigger than it was as he had not yet been to Midtown or Buckhead
This was yesterday.
Not to derail the thread,I wont mention his thoughts on Philly.
How did you count only 26 neighborhoods at over 5,000 ppsm for Houston? For Example Alief area (77099, 77072, 2/5 of 77082 and 77083) is a region with 200,000+ people in Houston and a average density between 6,000-8,000 people. It alone probably has 5-10 neighborhoods over 5,000 ppsm or if you count it as 1 it's only 1 neighborhood over than density but it in itself is a pretty large somewhere around 30-50 square miles. How do you define neighborhood, Houston vs. Atlanta. Atlanta area has roughly 8-9 zip codes over 5,000 ppsm, Houston area has like 34 zip codes with over 5,000 ppsm. I find it hard to believe they have less neighborhoods than zip codes with over 5,000 ppsm. Unless you only count the super-neighborhoods as being over 5,000 ppsm.
Last edited by NigerianNightmare; 03-13-2020 at 11:01 AM..
All 3 of these cities are similar. None of them are a bastion of urbanity. They just weren't built that way.
I think the common thread is that they are all working to become more urban. This is also happening at about the same pace.
Did you know that it is mostly the same developers who are developing all 3 cities??? The same builders, same architects, same developers, same franchises, same home builders etc.etc. if you want to split hairs then think of this. It's all drama.
Downtown Dallas is a mess, the whole downtown area is blocked in by freeways and a river bed. It has way too much park land. Street level parking lots take up too much space.
They screwed up downtown Dallas so bad that they had to just abandon downtown and start over again on the other side of the freeway and call it Uptown. Ya, downtown had such a bad reputation that they even had to change the name of the new downtown and call it "Uptown". Why didnt they call it Midtown Dallas?
It's fun and interesting discussing the nuances and getting into the nitty gritty of it all. Comparing Philly, Boston, and SF with these three wouldn't be nearly as engaging.
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.
This is kind of a moot point
