Will Atlanta become the 5th largest metropolitan area in the country? (neighborhoods, beautiful)

[MichiganderTexan]

Originally Posted by evannole

More of Texas's population (67%) lives in metro areas of 1M+ inhabitants, however. There are four such metro areas in Texas - DFW, Houston, Austin and San Antonio. ATL is the only such metro in Georgia, and it represents just 56% of the population.

I agree that turning Texas blue does seem like an uphill battle, but its urban/rural ratio in comparison to Georgia's does seem to indicate that it should be possible.

The biggest difference is Texas has a much larger Hispanic population. They seem to be mixed as far as voting Democrat or Republican. Georgia has a far larger black percentage in their population than Texas and they tend to vote mostly Democrat.

[Pure-Cabinet]

I'd be willing to bet that extreme heat, increased flooding, stronger hurricane activity and endless sprawl will knock the relative wind out Houston's growth sails in the next 20 - 30 years. Dallas and ATL are probably far enough inland that the effects of climate change won't hamper growth as much, but the heat and sprawl seem to be inescapable for these metros.

[DabOnEm]

Originally Posted by Pure-Cabinet

I'd be willing to bet that extreme heat, increased flooding, stronger hurricane activity and endless sprawl will knock the relative wind out Houston's growth sails in the next 20 - 30 years. Dallas and ATL are probably far enough inland that the effects of climate change won't hamper growth as much, but the heat and sprawl seem to be inescapable for these metros.

Nah. The heat Houston deals with is no better or worse than what Dallas deals with (ATL is a little cooler though). The flooding is much more under control and was a man made issue anyway due to lazy ordinances and codes. Now that those are stronger the city has done better. The sprawl part... Houston has a denser urban area than both DFW and ATL so not sure sprawl will matter at all.

No one can accurately predict how climate change will affect every region. It's all guesses especially if it's anything over the next 100 years, and most of the Houston metro is inland and at least 75-100ft above sea level anyway.

[ShenardL]

Originally Posted by DabOnEm

Nah. The heat Houston deals with is no better or worse than what Dallas deals with (ATL is a little cooler though). The flooding is much more under control and was a man made issue anyway due to lazy ordinances and codes. Now that those are stronger the city has done better. The sprawl part... Houston has a denser urban area than both DFW and ATL so not sure sprawl will matter at all.

No one can accurately predict how climate change will affect every region. It's all guesses especially if it's anything over the next 100 years, and most of the Houston metro is inland and at least 75-100ft above sea level anyway.

When I went to Houston, the downtown there didn't feel as urban as Atlanta's downtown/midtown area. Likewise to the Galleria area versus Buckhead.

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by ShenardL

When I went to Houston, the downtown there didn't feel as urban as Atlanta's downtown/midtown area. Likewise to the Galleria area versus Buckhead.

It's not the specific core as in inner neighborhoods Downtowns but more like Houston inner loop is more denser than Atlanta's ITP.

Houston as well any sunbelt west of the Mississippi is belt like a smaller LA. NY and Chicago are overtly more urban than LA but yet LA Metro area is denser. This throws people off until understand what happening. It's that eastern cities and metros have way more variety home plots sizes in there suburbs etc big, small, medium, etc. then Western cities. In Western cities are near constant in a set medium home plots.

Like 90% of Houston and DFW are develop some where with in this range of home plots.

Houston Montrose

Where Atlanta has more variety

Very Small
Atlanta Reynoldstown
Medium
Atlanta morningside
Large
Atlanta Adams Park

So what happens DT/MT and rest of Atlanta core neighborhoods feel more urban than Houston and Dallas because Atlanta is slightly more older 1870-1930. , Where Houston and Dallas 1890 to 1950. Atlanta was 154,839 in 1910 where Houston was 78,800. So Atlanta core is more traditionally urban. Not to mention Houston and Dallas went a little more crazy with urban renewal in the 1960's. Even in some neighborhoods where Houston is denser Atlanta still feel more urban and human scale.


While outside there core Houston and Dallas are develop more dense suburbia. But to be honest it make sense why Atlanta has more yard variety. Atlanta is more hilly and scenic.

[bryantm3]

Thanks for that post, very insightful. I didn't know Texas cities had that development pattern.

[MichiganderTexan]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

It's not the specific core as in inner neighborhoods Downtowns but more like Houston inner loop is more denser than Atlanta's ITP.

Houston as well any sunbelt west of the Mississippi is belt like a smaller LA. NY and Chicago are overtly more urban than LA but yet LA Metro area is denser. This throws people off until understand what happening. It's that eastern cities and metros have way more variety home plots sizes in there suburbs etc big, small, medium, etc. then Western cities. In Western cities are near constant in a set medium home plots.

Like 90% of Houston and DFW are develop some where with in this range of home plots.

Houston Montrose

Where Atlanta has more variety

Very Small
Atlanta Reynoldstown
Medium
Atlanta morningside
Large
Atlanta Adams Park

So what happens DT/MT and rest of Atlanta core neighborhoods feel more urban than Houston and Dallas because Atlanta is slightly more older 1870-1930. , Where Houston and Dallas 1890 to 1950. Atlanta was 154,839 in 1910 where Houston was 78,800. So Atlanta core is more traditionally urban. Not to mention Houston and Dallas went a little more crazy with urban renewal in the 1960's. Even in some neighborhoods where Houston is denser Atlanta still feel more urban and human scale.


While outside there core Houston and Dallas are develop more dense suburbia. But to be honest it make sense why Atlanta has more yard variety. Atlanta is more hilly and scenic.

Very good post, you need to post in the city-vs-city posts sometime where people are constantly arguing about urbanity.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by DabOnEm

Nah. The heat Houston deals with is no better or worse than what Dallas deals with (ATL is a little cooler though). The flooding is much more under control and was a man made issue anyway due to lazy ordinances and codes. Now that those are stronger the city has done better. The sprawl part... Houston has a denser urban area than both DFW and ATL so not sure sprawl will matter at all.

No one can accurately predict how climate change will affect every region. It's all guesses especially if it's anything over the next 100 years, and most of the Houston metro is inland and at least 75-100ft above sea level anyway.

Houston is denser. It has more condos/townhomes and apartments than DFW and Atlanta in the inner area. Atlanta has more lightly populated industrial area inside 285 than the comparable areas in DFW and Houston.

[DabOnEm]

Originally Posted by MichiganderTexan

Very good post, you need to post in the city-vs-city posts sometime where people are constantly arguing about urbanity.

The Houston vs ATL vs DFW arguments have been going on for a while. There was a recent thread in city vs city where Texas people made some good arguments. For example, ATL's core is more urban, but it's also a smaller core. Now that city living has been popular in the sunbelt for the last 20+ years, the cores of Dallas and Houston has been filling in nicely as well. Dallas especially has a pretty walkable core connected via rail and streetcars.

Originally Posted by chiatldal

It's not the specific core as in inner neighborhoods Downtowns but more like Houston inner loop is more denser than Atlanta's ITP.

Houston as well any sunbelt west of the Mississippi is belt like a smaller LA. NY and Chicago are overtly more urban than LA but yet LA Metro area is denser. This throws people off until understand what happening. It's that eastern cities and metros have way more variety home plots sizes in there suburbs etc big, small, medium, etc. then Western cities. In Western cities are near constant in a set medium home plots.

Like 90% of Houston and DFW are develop some where with in this range of home plots.

Houston Montrose

Where Atlanta has more variety

Very Small
Atlanta Reynoldstown
Medium
Atlanta morningside
Large
Atlanta Adams Park

So what happens DT/MT and rest of Atlanta core neighborhoods feel more urban than Houston and Dallas because Atlanta is slightly more older 1870-1930. , Where Houston and Dallas 1890 to 1950. Atlanta was 154,839 in 1910 where Houston was 78,800. So Atlanta core is more traditionally urban. Not to mention Houston and Dallas went a little more crazy with urban renewal in the 1960's. Even in some neighborhoods where Houston is denser Atlanta still feel more urban and human scale.

While outside there core Houston and Dallas are develop more dense suburbia. But to be honest it make sense why Atlanta has more yard variety. Atlanta is more hilly and scenic.

Yeah I like how ATL kept more of it's core intact. Dallas did okay with this and Houston did terribly. This is part of the reason it took them longer to connect the dots (other than having larger cores in general, especially Houston).

Overall though Atlanta definitely has the more traditional core (albeit smaller than Houston's). I hear you on the human scale thing (something the Texas two are playing catch up on), but when you consider how quickly the density drops off in Atlanta versus the consistency in the other two I don't think it matters too much. To me that's what makes the Texas two feel denser and more urban in some ways (not all). Even with ATL having several more neighborhoods with higher walkability scores, the flipside is those neighborhoods are tiny in comparison to the neighborhoods in the other city. If you were to chop up some of these larger neighborhoods in the Texas two then you'd get higher walkability scores.

Atlanta is definitely more scenic than the other two, but it's also not the only very hilly metro area out there. It's not like it had to be built as the least dense metro over 5M in the world, but it does makes for a unique layout. Always amazed at how much land on average people in ATL have, although the newer neighborhoods out there seem to be built like those in the western US with homes built very close together.

To think back on where these cities were 15-20 years ago, it's amazing to see the progress in all of them.

[ShenardL]

Originally Posted by bu2

Houston is denser. It has more condos/townhomes and apartments than DFW and Atlanta in the inner area. Atlanta has more lightly populated industrial area inside 285 than the comparable areas in DFW and Houston.

I don't know about the ITP and its equivalent but for the main cores (downtown, midtown, buckhead), Atlanta is denser compared to its equivalents in Dallas and Houston. There are also more people walking in these areas in Atlanta.