ATLANTA | Development Thread VI

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by Verge

Window cleaning-- and no the need will never go away--

wait, for real? the construction scaffolding on the sidewalk is permanent? what kind of shit is that.

[gatorsnake]

Originally Posted by Verge

Window cleaning-- and no the need will never go away--

It doesn't look like just window cleaning to me. It looks like the balcony rails have been removed and are undergoing some kind of remediation. But its been that way for years.

I have a hard time believing scaffolding will be allowed permanently on Peachtree for window cleaning. No other highrise has that.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by cabasse

wait, for real? the construction scaffolding on the sidewalk is permanent? what kind of shit is that.

Perhaps not-- but those appear to be window cleaning hoists--
Could be repairs that are just taking a long time in the age of Covid-19--

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by NiffTheFox

Keep in mind that the buildings in the foreground have been edited to appear dull gray so that the rendering will stand out.

I thought they'd done that to the building as well... tbh it looms over the street and looks incredibly dull compared to what's there, and we lose more tree canopy. Hoping this project gets canned.

Re: the census, it seems to me like the "census urbanized area" population is probably the most accurate, leaving out most of the far-flung areas... although the number is lower than the MSA and CSA, so it doesn't serve the same purpose for bragging rights.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

I thought they'd done that to the building as well... tbh it looms over the street and looks incredibly dull compared to what's there, and we lose more tree canopy. Hoping this project gets canned.

Re: the census, it seems to me like the "census urbanized area" population is probably the most accurate, leaving out most of the far-flung areas... although the number is lower than the MSA and CSA, so it doesn't serve the same purpose for bragging rights.

Urbanized area is based on density-- in Atlanta that is relative, since we are one of the least dense large metro areas in the country-- also this statistic is NOT kept by the census bureau but somewhat arbitrarily by other organizations, or worse, individuals-- For the record, Metro areas and CSA's, at least in the US, are the best way to compare urban areas-- Is Gainesville part of Metro Atlanta?-- a few years ago I would have said no-- but lately there is a pretty good case to be made (for CSA numbers)--

[NYbyWAYofGA]

Originally Posted by Verge

Urbanized area is based on density-- in Atlanta that is relative, since we are one of the least dense large metro areas in the country-- also this statistic is NOT kept by the census bureau but somewhat arbitrarily by other organizations, or worse, individuals-- For the record, Metro areas and CSA's, at least in the US, are the best way to compare urban areas-- Is Gainesville part of Metro Atlanta?-- a few years ago I would have said no-- but lately there is a pretty good case to be made (for CSA numbers)--

I would really like to know should Atlanta still be considered the least dense of the large metro areas in this country. I mean, the city and area has made huge strides these past couple of decades, especially ITP.

[Atlriser]

I would argue Gainesville should be included but I’m not a statistician. I know in our business we regularly have meetings and work in Hall county now and that was not the case 10 years ago. It seems common among my peers as well to have to ‘travel’ to Gainesville fairly often now. It’s like going to Cumming or Carteresville it seems. I’d say it is just another north suburb of Atlanta.

Just a personal observation.

[NiffTheFox]

Originally Posted by NYbyWAYofGA

I would really like to know should Atlanta still be considered the least dense of the large metro areas in this country. I mean, the city and area has made huge strides these past couple of decades, especially ITP.

It depends on how you are defining the area in question. If you are simply dividing the MSA population by the total associated land area, then Atlanta's aggregate density is going to look pretty low b/c of the comparatively low population contributions of the outlaying counties relative to their physical size. But I think such an approach can lead to misleading impressions since it doesn't tell you anything about the pattern of distribution. It probably can't be helped if the goal is to have a consistent measure, but that doesn't mean we should ignore how outcomes are sensitive to methodology.

[atl2phx]

Originally Posted by NYbyWAYofGA

I would really like to know should Atlanta still be considered the least dense of the large metro areas in this country. I mean, the city and area has made huge strides these past couple of decades, especially ITP.

not the exact answer to your question, but helpful insight here:

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=246305

[Verge]

Originally Posted by atl2phx

not the exact answer to your question, but helpful insight here:

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=246305

Again city populations (political boundaries) mean next to nothing--

[Verge]

Originally Posted by NiffTheFox

It depends on how you are defining the area in question. If you are simply dividing the MSA population by the total associated land area, then Atlanta's aggregate density is going to look pretty low b/c of the comparatively low population contributions of the outlaying counties relative to their physical size. But I think such an approach can lead to misleading impressions since it doesn't tell you anything about the pattern of distribution. It probably can't be helped if the goal is to have a consistent measure, but that doesn't mean we should ignore how outcomes are sensitive to methodology.

Hence the inaccuracy (or arbitrary nature) of density figures-- urban area calculations determine only population above a certain density threshold. And no I dont think Atlanta is the least dense big city (I never said that)-- but it is still probably among the least. This is true of most modern cities-- Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, etc.-- Surprisingly LA is among the most dense--

[NiffTheFox]

Originally Posted by Verge

Hence the inaccuracy (or arbitrary nature) of density figures-- urban area calculations determine only population above a certain density threshold. And no I dont think Atlanta is the least dense big city (I never said that)-- but it is still probably among the least. This is true of most modern cities-- Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, etc.-- Surprisingly LA is among the most dense--

My comment wasn't directed at you. FWIW, the issue with density isn't accuracy, which is function of our measurement tools and is also improvable, but sensitively to arbitrary thresholds (both the level of density we choose as the cutoff as well as the continuous area to define it - I'm not saying you disagree with this, but the two concepts are not interchangeable). But this is an issue with pretty much any metric as the "goodness" of a measure is dependent on agreement with the purpose it serves.

Your example of LA is instructive on this point as it can be characterized as having greater or lesser density than NY depending on where you choose to set the boundaries. LA lacks NY's peak density, but its urban/suburban density drops off at a lower rate, so aggregate density can be greater if the area of comparison is large enough. Atlanta is something like this (in terms of the distribution pattern - it is obviously not in the same league of either city in absolute terms). Atlanta lacks a region of very high sustained density, but the density drop off in its inner suburbs is also not that great. There is a pretty significant drop-off as you transition to the outer suburbs, hence the low MSA density, but the point is you could remove 80% of the metro region by county area and still have a respectable "city" of nearly 4 million. Or to put it another way: The 10 inner counties of Atlanta metro area have almost exactly the same population and area (i.e. the same aggregate density) as the Boston MSA. Again, I don't mean to suggest this isn't something you already know, since you mentioned an interest in this topic, but I want to underscore the point about how results are a function of the chosen methodology and even using a consistent standard (e.g. census) doesn't mean you don't get misleading results since you can't hold geography and other factors constant.

[L41A]

Originally Posted by newuserbuckhead

Wikipedia is a reliable source. This has been studied academically and anecdotally for years and every time they come to the same conclusion, that Wikipedia is reliable.
Washington Post article from 2015

While I wouldn't site it as a primary source on a paper for a class, I would certainly go there to gain general knowledge on a wide variety of topics. US Metro populations is one of those topics. The US Census Bureau's website was cited and linked in the page, and every edit is monitored and checked.

Not sure why you quoted me...

I did say Wikipedia was not the "best" which seems to concur with what you stated that you wouldn't site it as a primary source. In fact, if you read my post in its entirety I was defending Wikipedia in this particular case.

The person was casting shadow when he saw Athens-Clarke in Atlanta CSA. He didn't seem to see that the list (that he called "absurd") contained both MSA and CSA components for all cities mention not just Atlanta. And the population estimates in the list was for the MSAs and not the CSAs.

I didn't say it was not "reliable". You should have just quoted the person who mentioned it was not "reliable".

[Verge]

Originally Posted by NiffTheFox

My comment wasn't directed at you. FWIW, the issue with density isn't accuracy, which is function of our measurement tools and is also improvable, but sensitively to arbitrary thresholds (both the level of density we choose as the cutoff as well as the continuous area to define it - I'm not saying you disagree with this, but the two concepts are not interchangeable). But this is an issue with pretty much any metric as the "goodness" of a measure is dependent on agreement with the purpose it serves.

Your example of LA is instructive on this point as it can be characterized as having greater or lesser density than NY depending on where you choose to set the boundaries. LA lacks NY's peak density, but its urban/suburban density drops off at a lower rate, so aggregate density can be greater if the area of comparison is large enough. Atlanta is something like this (in terms of the distribution pattern - it is obviously not in the same league of either city in absolute terms). Atlanta lacks a region of very high sustained density, but the density drop off in its inner suburbs is also not that great. There is a pretty significant drop-off as you transition to the outer suburbs, hence the low MSA density, but the point is you could remove 80% of the metro region by county area and still have a respectable "city" of nearly 4 million. Or to put it another way: The 10 inner counties of Atlanta metro area have almost exactly the same population and area (i.e. the same aggregate density) as the Boston MSA. Again, I don't mean to suggest this isn't something you already know, since you mentioned an interest in this topic, but I want to underscore the point about how results are a function of the chosen methodology and even using a consistent standard (e.g. census) doesn't mean you don't get misleading results since you can't hold geography and other factors constant.

Thanks-- all of this is true-- you seem to be a demographics nerd as well ;-) . I still maintain that MSAs and in many cases CSAs are the best way to compare the relative sizes of metropolitan cites. Almost anything is better that city populations-- Atlanta is far-flung and Athens and Gainesville now seem more like the suburbs than not with a pretty continuous area of development between here and there-- At the very least census bureau standards are consistent across all metro areas across the country-- Atlanta's geography is not challenging, esp. when compared to a place like Seattle (lakes and mountains) or San Francisco (a narrow peninsula)--

[Verge]

Originally Posted by L41A

Not sure why you quoted me...

I did say Wikipedia was not the "best" which seems to concur with what you stated that you wouldn't site it as a primary source. In fact, if you read my post in its entirety I was defending Wikipedia in this particular case.

The person was casting shadow when he saw Athens-Clarke in Atlanta CSA. He didn't seem to see that the list (that he called "absurd") contained both MSA and CSA components for all cities mention not just Atlanta. And the population estimates in the list was for the MSAs and not the CSAs.

I didn't say it was not "reliable". You should have just quoted the person who mentioned it was not "reliable".

While I would never trust Wikipedia completely-- their population numbers are just copies of the census bureau estimates-- This is a relatively easy check since the census bureau estimates are readily available. The commenter misunderstood the numbers because of the way they were copied/ formatted-- None-the-less Atlanta's CSA is approaching 7 million and its MSA, 6 million--

[Atlriser]

While this isn’t the forum to be discussing this, how long if ever before Chattanooga could possibly be in the CSA or Macon for that fact? Chattanooga and Atlanta MSA’s are currently separated by 1 county and are growing toward each other. Macon’s growth is heavily northward toward Forsyth as metro Atlanta steadily creeps south with all the distribution centers and housing developments along 75 between both metros.

[Martinman]

Originally Posted by Verge

Urbanized area is based on density-- in Atlanta that is relative, since we are one of the least dense large metro areas in the country-- also this statistic is NOT kept by the census bureau but somewhat arbitrarily by other organizations, or worse, individuals--  For the record, Metro areas and CSA's, at least in the US, are the best way to compare urban areas--   Is Gainesville part of Metro Atlanta?-- a few years ago I would have said no-- but lately there is a pretty good case to be made (for CSA numbers)--

Urban area is in fact a statistic that is defined by the census bureau.  It's basically just a contiguous minimum density surrounding a city larger than 50,000.   In terms of determining a cities true relative size, there are pros and cons for each statistic.  For example, Miami gets a boost in the urban area ranking due to the development being condensed along the Atlantic coast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas

Originally Posted by NYbyWAYofGA

I would really like to know should Atlanta still be considered the least dense of the large metro areas in this country. I mean, the city and area has made huge strides these past couple of decades, especially ITP.

Of urban areas greater than 4 million, it is very likely that we are still easily the least dense. 

[tdawg]

Google’s taking 500k sq feet in 1105. That logo is gonna look great lit up on that tower.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by Martinman

Urban area is in fact a statistic that is defined by the census bureau.  It's basically just a contiguous minimum density surrounding a city larger than 50,000.   In terms of determining a cities true relative size, there are pros and cons for each statistic.  For example, Miami gets a boost in the urban area ranking due to the development being condensed along the Atlantic coast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas



Of urban areas greater than 4 million, it is very likely that we are still easily the least dense. 

The census urbanized area statistic is used to determine the core of MSAs and CSAs and is seldom used by anyone to compare city sizes-- its apparently only figured at census time-- there are no yearly updates, indicating its comparative unimportance to demographers. Still its interesting-- Atlanta still ranks about the same relative to pier cities, but it's density as a metro is substantially less--

[1lifealex]

Here's an interesting website for you guys to look at https://urbanize.city/atlanta/