ATLANTA | Development Thread V

[Atlanta3000]

It looks like Atlanta is definitely in the Top 10 and could be going higher up the list this year with the momentum we are seeing at the start of 2015!


TOP 10 CITIES WITH THE MOST DEVELOPMENT - Nov 11, 2014

1) Houston, construction starts (January-September 2014): $25.1B, 176% year-to-year change
2) New York, $23.3B, 36%
3) Dallas, $10.8B, -3%
4) Washingston, DC, $8.4B, 13%
5) Los Angeles, $7.7B, 9%
6) Chicago, $7.5B, 23%
7) Atlanta, $6.6B, 8%
8) Miami, $6B, 19%
9) Boston, $5.5B, -10%
10) Seattle, $5.4B, 7%

https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/com...ties-With-the-Most-Development-40361#ath

[jpdivola]

IMO Atlanta's core should benchmark it self against: The yuppie, smart growth cities: Seattle, Denver, Portland, Minneapolis and then the other sunbelt boomtowns: Dallas, Houston and maybe Phoenix. Miami is a little too much of a resort town.
The first 4 are not traditionally super-urban cities that have made major investments in cohesive mixed use urban centers. Dallas and Houston are obvious sunbelt competitors.

Ultimately, Seattle is pretty much the gold standard that central Atlanta should be aiming for.

My sense is that Atlanta is probably seeing less growth than either Dallas or Houston, but it is probably seeing more concentrated cohesive growth in the Midtown core. Whereas, the development in Houston and Dallas is a little more diluted across various pockets of the city? Midtown seems more likely to emerge as a Seattle style walkable, vibrant urban core than anything going on in Houston and Dallas.


EDIT: the Forbes list posted above appears to be MSA or city wide. I'm speaking more about central core development.

[Ant131531]

The problem with Atlanta is that a lot of the development potential is going to Buckhead and Perimeter. If it were all in Downtown and Midtown the entire core would urbanize faster.

[simms3_redux]

Originally Posted by RATBOYKEV

If you look at the completed, constructed, and proposed residential #s versus the 2010 census, the increase in density is on the order of 75%. In only ~9 years, this has to be among the fastest percentage growth in the nation for a neighborhood.

The previous census period for "core" Midtown saw ~63% growth, meaning that from 2000 to 2020, Midtown could see 190% growth even with a the largest recession in decades in that timespan.

The problem with that analysis is that Atlanta's core still has to grow A LOT and to a much greater density to really be comparable to a wide range of cities already "there". In this day and age 1-2 tiny Census Tracts of 20k+ ppsm holding ~10k people is not enough to support a large, truly vibrant core. I do get excited to see the numbers improve for Midtown, etc. To put things in perspective, my whole zip code is at around 55k ppsm and has only a few high rises. Chicago's high rise districts top off around 60-80k ppsm, and those high rises are taller and bigger than Atlanta's. There's actually a limit to the kind of density these podium-based luxury/bigger-unit high rise apartments/condos can bring and there's always a danger of creating dead zones with parking/podiums.

Midtown's constantly getting better and better, though.

Originally Posted by jpdivola

IMO Atlanta's core should benchmark it self against: The yuppie, smart growth cities: Seattle, Denver, Portland, Minneapolis and then the other sunbelt boomtowns: Dallas, Houston and maybe Phoenix. Miami is a little too much of a resort town.
The first 4 are not traditionally super-urban cities that have made major investments in cohesive mixed use urban centers. Dallas and Houston are obvious sunbelt competitors.

Ultimately, Seattle is pretty much the gold standard that central Atlanta should be aiming for.

My sense is that Atlanta is probably seeing less growth than either Dallas or Houston, but it is probably seeing more concentrated cohesive growth in the Midtown core. Whereas, the development in Houston and Dallas is a little more diluted across various pockets of the city? Midtown seems more likely to emerge as a Seattle style walkable, vibrant urban core than anything going on in Houston and Dallas.


EDIT: the Forbes list posted above appears to be MSA or city wide. I'm speaking more about central core development.

The Forbes list really doesn't tell the whole story, either. I can speak to a few of these cities and say with confidence the number is either light or heavy, generally light. And San Francisco isn't even on there when there are 2 $1Bn high rises under construction right now (and a $2 Bn hospital UC with a $700M hospital that just opened on 2/1/15) in the city alone, let alone the many billions of dollars being invested privately in real estate throughout the rest of the city and metro. So in a nutshell, leave it up to Forbes to fuck up numbers, lol.

Originally Posted by Ant131531

The problem with Atlanta is that a lot of the development potential is going to Buckhead and Perimeter. If it were all in Downtown and Midtown the entire core would urbanize faster.

This is true. Atlanta is very multi-nodal and diluted as a result. Buckhead is also not the most efficient "node" to try to urbanize (let alone Perimeter which is just embarassing how they are trying to "urbanize" it when it's only marginally better unplanned sprawl at best...there is a total need for both submarkets, though).

[oldpainless]

Originally Posted by jpk1292000

Agreed...I frankly hope that the whole thing is a bust. Not just because I live Intown and don't like that the Braves are moving, but because Cobb has handled the whole transportation aspect of the project they way they always have - a car-dominated solution, implicit in which is a desire to attract a certain demographic and keep others away. To me, the tide is changing. Jobs and population are moving near public transit. Just look at State Farm, Mercedes, NCR, Pulte Group, and half a dozen other corporate relocations in the past 3 - 5 years. Cobb and the Braves have given the old F-you to this trend and said we're here to provide a product to SUV-driving suburbanites.

Give me a break. SunTrust Park is right on 285, not 20 miles outside the perimeter. If it were moved 1000' south it would be ITP. Would you be OK with it then? Sans mass transit, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the location. And please don't make this a racial issue. Have you attended a Braves game at Turner Field? Turner Field's location has no bearing on the racial makeup of fans in attendance. Neither will SunTrust Park. The fans will go where the game is.

In time I am confident a transit option will serve the Cumberland area eventually. Its the logical next step in urbanism. T-SPLOST was supposed to send light rail to Cumberland, and guess who was 100% behind it? That's right Tim Lee, Cobb County Chairman. These outer submarkets are newer (and by default more car dependent) and are still evolving, so don't knock them for something that is before their time. They haven't arrived yet in terms of urbanism. They don't have a 40, 60, 80 year head start. But that will change. In the mean time, wishing for the failure of a franchise and a county because they don't align with your ideals is petty and silly.

[bryantm3]

cobb county's leadership really does have this kind of "fuck you" attitude towards the rest of the metro area. they think they are in competition with metro atlanta rather than being in the same boat. they are actively trying to keep out the "wrong crowd"— this is why they oppose transit there. it's not that they're catching up, it's that they think cobb county is some kind of elite bastion that everyone is dying to get into, and they have to open and close the velvet rope to keep their county like they want it.

if the braves had moved to gwinnett, i don't think you would see such a strong reaction. sure, people would be disappointed about the lack of transit, the loss for intown residents, but people wouldn't be pressing t shirts and swearing off the entire damned franchise:


source:http://atltees.bigcartel.com/product/the-fuck-cobb-county-shirt-red

[simms3_redux]

^^^Agreed. Cobb Co is not the same kind of "plus" to Metro Atlanta that North Fulton is, or Gwinnett. At least when I lived in Atlanta, I recall Cobb Co being pretty much the place in Atlanta that attempted to retain and grow its lily white, conservative status and opposed to efforts by the city and other regions of the metro trying to form a cohesive, transit-served connected and cosmopolitan metropolitan area. I think this attitude extends down to the individual people I know that live in Cobb Co, so it's definitely a thing.

There was such a thing as Braves Country, which extended from N FL through TN, AL, SC, and NC. People came into Atlanta, the city, which represents not only the South as a whole, but this so-called Braves Country, and Braves games resulted in filled DT Atlanta hotel rooms, a DT Atlanta skyline backdrop, references to the 1996 Olympics, and while sparse immediately surrounding Turner Field, post-game activities were somewhat centralized around DT Atlanta. Crowds congregating in the subway to get to the shuttle. Tailgating in the stadium lots in the heart of Atlanta and in the former boundary of the former stadium (I suppose paying homage to history). Crowds dispersing to downtown and other intown neighborhoods post-game.

Now it's in Cobb Co, which has purposefully "shielded" itself from being "part of Atlanta". I think that's an F You to everyone but the northern suburban fans. What about less privileged fans closer into the city? What about those traveling to Atlanta to watch a game from other cities? How is it that Cobb Co is a positive? Uber, Lyft, and cab services are less than sparse up there (speaking from experience). It's just that far removed from the rest of the metro.

Not to mention, baseball parks (and arenas) are big tools of revitalization in other cities (I get that part of the argument was that the city kind of dropped the ball, along with the Braves, on allowing Turner Field to revitalize the surrounding area...but who's fault is that? I'd say as much the Braves as anyone else).

Watching the bold moves by organizations here in the Bay Area (Giants, Warriors, potentially the A's and the Raiders), I know that a sports franchise can be more than just a sports franchise.

My wish would have been to see the giant Falcons stadium pushed to burbs (as is common elsewhere) and the Ballpark/Braves central to a revitalization of Grant Park. The literal opposite has happened. The Falcons continue to pave over and divide urban neighborhoods (because a football stadium is honestly too big and requires too much parking for an urban locale, imo), and the Braves hauled ass to the whitest of white/red country burbs.

Too bad...

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

Atlanta's just a few years behind everyone else. What's happening in Atlanta is impressive, though. It's more "transformational".

Houston in particular is just on a whole different level in terms of sheer volume of units/construction/infill, and they are adding office.

Austin is explosive for such a small city - literally on fire. Adding more in their CBD and more infill than Atlanta and yet it's a much smaller market.

Miami - just seriously, it's insane. Incomprehensible what's going up down there. However, I have more faith in Atlanta's Midtown becoming a vibrant mixed-use cosmopolitan neighborhood (complete with universities and world class cultural offerings) than Brickell's/DT Miami's area "feeling" the same way, no matter how many tall high rises go up.

Seattle - just unbelievable what's going on there. All sustainable/economic based, bringing permanent residents and energy. Seattle's already vibrant/on another level, though.

Philly
DC
SF
Chicago
NYC

I mean Atlanta's up there, but definitely not top 10 in terms of development. Consider that at least 3 major cities are currently adding new tallests (all supertalls) and NYC is adding a whole array of supertalls (I think Miami's adding a new tallest, as well, though not a supertall). Chicago has 2 adjacent ~700-750 ft office towers rising, among a ton of others.

This is what happens when you recover from the latest recession and then expand and grow...we are in a nationwide growth cycle and many cities are capitalizing, including Atlanta, though to a lesser degree than others.

Wanted to go back to this post, particular on the last 2 paragraphs. What's odd is that Atlanta has 3x the job growth of Chicago and Philly, yet they're adding office buildings and supertalls? I even read back on City-data that they haven't recovered the jobs they've lost yet from the recession. Atlanta just got around to recovering the jobs and now beginning to add new jobs. Strange to me. Chicago and Philly are underperforming as far as job growth.

Atlanta's job growth is up there with Boston, Seattle, and Denver, yet of course still lags behind the giants of Houston, Dallas, NYC, and L.A.

Atlanta is adding office buildings though, but they're going to Buckhead and Perimeter as usual, though we will get a few office buildings being built here like the NRC headquarters in Midtown and Worldpay at Atlantic Station.

[testarossa50]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Wanted to go back to this post, particular on the last 2 paragraphs. What's odd is that Atlanta has 3x the job growth of Chicago and Philly, yet they're adding office buildings and supertalls? I even read back on City-data that they haven't recovered the jobs they've lost yet from the recession. Atlanta just got around to recovering the jobs and now beginning to add new jobs. Strange to me. Chicago and Philly are underperforming as far as job growth.

Atlanta's job growth is up there with Boston, Seattle, and Denver, yet of course still lags behind the giants of Houston, Dallas, NYC, and L.A.

Atlanta is adding office buildings though, but they're going to Buckhead and Perimeter as usual, though we will get a few office buildings being built here like the NRC headquarters in Midtown and Worldpay at Atlantic Station.

A couple things:

- Atlanta's economy took a beating during the recession that left us with a big glut of office space. This has taken years to work through.
- Atlanta is notorious for being a "20/20" market: 20% vacancy and $20/SF/yr rents for prime office space. Another notable example of this is Dallas. Both cities are unconstrained geographically and witness large booms in construction whenever rents and vacancies are favorable. For other cities, notably in east coast markets, it can take ages to build anything and rent is considerably higher in prime CBD buildings (where the vast majority of office space is concentrated, mind you). In Atlanta, rent is highest in Buckhead, while downtown rent is the same as the suburbs, but significantly it's more expensive to build new square footage there compared to the suburbs.

Hence, we are a 20/20 market an not ideal for new trophy towers generally.

Midtown rent is very high as well, but fills less reliably at these high levels compared with space in Buckhead.

[testarossa50]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

Atlanta's just a few years behind everyone else. What's happening in Atlanta is impressive, though. It's more "transformational".

Houston in particular is just on a whole different level in terms of sheer volume of units/construction/infill, and they are adding office.

Austin is explosive for such a small city - literally on fire. Adding more in their CBD and more infill than Atlanta and yet it's a much smaller market.

Miami - just seriously, it's insane. Incomprehensible what's going up down there. However, I have more faith in Atlanta's Midtown becoming a vibrant mixed-use cosmopolitan neighborhood (complete with universities and world class cultural offerings) than Brickell's/DT Miami's area "feeling" the same way, no matter how many tall high rises go up.

Seattle - just unbelievable what's going on there. All sustainable/economic based, bringing permanent residents and energy. Seattle's already vibrant/on another level, though.

Philly
DC
SF
Chicago
NYC

I mean Atlanta's up there, but definitely not top 10 in terms of development. Consider that at least 3 major cities are currently adding new tallests (all supertalls) and NYC is adding a whole array of supertalls (I think Miami's adding a new tallest, as well, though not a supertall). Chicago has 2 adjacent ~700-750 ft office towers rising, among a ton of others.

This is what happens when you recover from the latest recession and then expand and grow...we are in a nationwide growth cycle and many cities are capitalizing, including Atlanta, though to a lesser degree than others.

Not sure the stats bear this out. 2014 housing starts data are in:

http://www.census.gov/construction/bps/txt/t3yu201412.txt

Atlanta's clearly in pretty solid company with regard to the key multifamily number. We're ahead of Philly, Boston, Denver, and Chicago, in the same league as Miami and Austin, and a bit behind Seattle and DC. NYC, LA, SF, Dallas, and Houston are far ahead.

I guess you could argue a huge chunk of Atlanta's multifamily has been suburban, but I just don't really see it. Outside of central perimeter and Avalon, I can't think of many. And the Seattles of the world have their Bellevues that are attracting a ton of development too (I'm not trying to argue Atlanta is on the same level as Seattle; it isn't).

Next year is of course even more promising when it comes to multifamily for Atlanta, although this may be true of other cities as well.

In sum, I don't think fringe top-10 is out of the question when it comes to new development, at least on the residential side.

[jpk1292000]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

^^^Agreed. Cobb Co is not the same kind of "plus" to Metro Atlanta that North Fulton is, or Gwinnett. At least when I lived in Atlanta, I recall Cobb Co being pretty much the place in Atlanta that attempted to retain and grow its lily white, conservative status and opposed to efforts by the city and other regions of the metro trying to form a cohesive, transit-served connected and cosmopolitan metropolitan area. I think this attitude extends down to the individual people I know that live in Cobb Co, so it's definitely a thing.

There was such a thing as Braves Country, which extended from N FL through TN, AL, SC, and NC. People came into Atlanta, the city, which represents not only the South as a whole, but this so-called Braves Country, and Braves games resulted in filled DT Atlanta hotel rooms, a DT Atlanta skyline backdrop, references to the 1996 Olympics, and while sparse immediately surrounding Turner Field, post-game activities were somewhat centralized around DT Atlanta. Crowds congregating in the subway to get to the shuttle. Tailgating in the stadium lots in the heart of Atlanta and in the former boundary of the former stadium (I suppose paying homage to history). Crowds dispersing to downtown and other intown neighborhoods post-game.

Now it's in Cobb Co, which has purposefully "shielded" itself from being "part of Atlanta". I think that's an F You to everyone but the northern suburban fans. What about less privileged fans closer into the city? What about those traveling to Atlanta to watch a game from other cities? How is it that Cobb Co is a positive? Uber, Lyft, and cab services are less than sparse up there (speaking from experience). It's just that far removed from the rest of the metro.

Not to mention, baseball parks (and arenas) are big tools of revitalization in other cities (I get that part of the argument was that the city kind of dropped the ball, along with the Braves, on allowing Turner Field to revitalize the surrounding area...but who's fault is that? I'd say as much the Braves as anyone else).

Watching the bold moves by organizations here in the Bay Area (Giants, Warriors, potentially the A's and the Raiders), I know that a sports franchise can be more than just a sports franchise.

My wish would have been to see the giant Falcons stadium pushed to burbs (as is common elsewhere) and the Ballpark/Braves central to a revitalization of Grant Park. The literal opposite has happened. The Falcons continue to pave over and divide urban neighborhoods (because a football stadium is honestly too big and requires too much parking for an urban locale, imo), and the Braves hauled ass to the whitest of white/red country burbs.

Too bad...

^^^ This is mostly right on. The only plus is that both the Braves AND Falcons didn't bolt for the burbs.

[ATLcubs]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Atlanta is adding office buildings though, but they're going to Buckhead and Perimeter as usual, though we will get a few office buildings being built here like the NRC headquarters in Midtown and Worldpay at Atlantic Station.

I thought Worldpay was moving into an existing building?

[RudyJK]

Originally Posted by jpk1292000

^^^ This is mostly right on. The only plus is that both the Braves AND Falcons didn't bolt for the burbs.

"...I recall Cobb Co being pretty much the place in Atlanta that attempted to retain and grow its lily white, conservative status..."

Such nonsense. Cobb is 27% black now. It may be about mass transit but it's not about race.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/13/13067.html

[RocketSurgeon]

There's only a small corner project underway the lot on Northside at Northside where the convenience store was demolished, so no big news for that block after all.

Heights at West Midtown is really taking shape at the street... they're taking an unusual approach to that one by framing up an entire side before starting the rest. I think it will be an interesting design. Bishop is already looking very different.

[R1070]

Originally Posted by jpdivola

IMO Atlanta's core should benchmark it self against: The yuppie, smart growth cities: Seattle, Denver, Portland, Minneapolis and then the other sunbelt boomtowns: Dallas, Houston and maybe Phoenix. Miami is a little too much of a resort town.
The first 4 are not traditionally super-urban cities that have made major investments in cohesive mixed use urban centers. Dallas and Houston are obvious sunbelt competitors.

Ultimately, Seattle is pretty much the gold standard that central Atlanta should be aiming for.

My sense is that Atlanta is probably seeing less growth than either Dallas or Houston, but it is probably seeing more concentrated cohesive growth in the Midtown core. Whereas, the development in Houston and Dallas is a little more diluted across various pockets of the city? Midtown seems more likely to emerge as a Seattle style walkable, vibrant urban core than anything going on in Houston and Dallas.


EDIT: the Forbes list posted above appears to be MSA or city wide. I'm speaking more about central core development.

Dallas' Northern burbs (Richardson, Frisco, Plano) are going through a huge boom. As for the core, the Uptown/Oak Lawn/Knox-Henderson neighborhoods are experiencing a lot of urban development with even more in the pipeline. I'd be curious to see an Atlanta vs. Dallas development comparison suburban and central city.

The Houston area has a huge amount of development going on all over, much more than Dallas and Atlanta combined.

[Ant131531]

Houston will slow down. Dallas will remain steady. Atlanta will increase.

Dallas has more development right now, that's for certain.

[bobdreamz]

Originally Posted by Harry Cane

I go to Miami pretty regularly. What's going on down there is nothing short of impressive. The whole area east of I95 from Brickell north to Midtown is dotted with cranes. And we're talking 40-70 stories. One Miami forumer states there are 14 towers 500'+ under construction.

That would be me & there are now 15 towers over 500 feet |152 +m U/C in Miami proper at the moment in the downtown, Brickell & Edgewater districts. There are also more than a dozen or so projects under the 500 foot mark occurring in the West Brickell & the Midtown /Design district areas as well.
The list:

http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/interact...utput%5B%5D=list&dataSubmit=Show+Results

Upon completion Miami will be 3rd. in the US in the amount of towers above 500'|152 m with 45 in total.
Anyways it's good to see Atlanta's infill growing in it's urban core.

[BlueSangha]

Upon completion Miami will be 3rd. in the US in the amount of towers above 500'|152 m with 45 in total.
Anyways it's good to see Atlanta's infill growing in it's urban core.[/QUOTE]

And one direct hit by a Cat 5 hurricane later, there will be none.

[BlueSangha]

So...there's this:
http://atlanta.curbed.com/archives/2015/...asically-becoming-the-new-buckhead-3.php

[shivtim]

Guys, not to be a backseat moderator, but this is the Atlanta development forum. Please take off-topic discussion of skyscrapers and hurricanes in Miami, suburban development in Dallas, or demographics in Cobb to an appropriate thread. Here ya go:
Braves/Cobb
OTP Projects
City vs city
Dallas forum
Building permits by MSA
Job sprawl
Sunbelt city comparison