What keeps Atlanta from reaching LA, Chicago, or NYC levels?

[Tuckerman]

[QUOTE=Steely Dan;7959277]in chicago's case, you absolutely have the stereotypical city-hating, blood-red suburban conservative types, but specifically ]

you are so right. Even when I lived in Chicago city some decades ago (55th & Blackstone) my conservative relatives were afraid to visit me. My Chicago born relatives gradually moved further and further out (some were full of pride that they never went into the city- though my brother worked in the Loop). Kept moving further and further out towards Iowa. The pattern over the years has been a little different with Atlanta, but some north western and northern suburbs remain in denial the the primary reason for their existence is the growth of Atlanta. Politically the closer in suburbs are becoming more Democratic and the Dekalb suburbs vote heavily Democratic.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by tdawg

Interesting point above about traditionally blue states turning red as manufacturing declined and hopelessness rose, and red states turning purple or blue do to an influx of immigrants and more progressive Millennials. The times they are a changin'.

All the more reason why Bezos wouldn't base his decision based off of something so petty such as red state blue state politics.

[LSyd]

why? because ATL is really only 24/7 if you're in a select weird know of what's still open and kicking. if you're in and can handle it it's awesome. but it's also car dependent.

and the different counties and nodes are in way too much of a pissing contest to cooperate and make it better for everyone else, i.e., old southern jackassism.

-

[Minato Ku]

To give a French point of view. While Atlanta is known by name, I can't say that the city is really famous here.
Most people have no idea of how is Atlanta, they just know that it's a big american city (host of the Olympic games in 1996) but nothing more.

Even its big airport is quite unknow, Atantla airport is more a large domestic hub than a large international hub.
Apart if they need to go in a smaller American city with no direct flight or in Atlanta itself, people from France will not land in Atlanta.
They will directly land in New York City, Miami, Chicago, Los Angeles...

In France, a large part of the knowledge of American cities comes from TV and Atlanta is almost not represented in American TV series we get.

[Tuckerman]

[QUOTE=Minato Ku;7960464]To give a French point of view. While Atlanta is known by name, I can't say that the city is really famous here.
Most people have no idea of how is Atlanta, they just know that it's a big american city (host of the Olympic games in 1996) but nothing more.

Thanks for your comments. Although based in Atlanta, I was for several years an executive in an NGO based in Paris and stayed often for many days in the Montparnasse area. You are spot on that most people I met knew only of the Olympics and had a rather hazy idea of Atlanta. Nonetheless, Atlanta has a fairly active Alliance Francaise organization and Air France with its link to Delta (headquartered in Atlanta) has strong air connections to Atlanta.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Tuckerman

you are so right. Even when I lived in Chicago city some decades ago (55th & Blackstone) my conservative relatives were afraid to visit me. My Chicago born relatives gradually moved further and further out (some were full of pride that they never went into the city- though my brother worked in the Loop). Kept moving further and further out towards Iowa. The pattern over the years has been a little different with Atlanta, but some north western and northern suburbs remain in denial the the primary reason for their existence is the growth of Atlanta. Politically the closer in suburbs are becoming more Democratic and the Dekalb suburbs vote heavily Democratic.

Huge reversal now.

Everybody loves the center city now. They hate the taxes, politicians, and corruption, of course. But the actual environment of the city (cityscape, entertainment, culture, dining) is an unstoppable force that the burbs have zero hope of competing with. You simply fall in line and hope that you have good train service

[mousquet]

@Minato I guess our own take as Fr citizens is pretty pointless here, though.

I mean, let's face it, lots of people in our country think Hollywood and Vegas are trendy places to be. They believe things showed off by the American show business is real.

I hear some are shocked about the fact that so many in the US can't point France on a world map, but it's just as if you asked them where Wisconsin or Utah is in the US. They don't know, simply because their everyday lives don't require them to.

Sometimes, the Americans are funny too. Like when you're a tourist over there and state that you're from France, some may ask if you got there by driving. That's cute.

[dc_denizen]

Need more pics!

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by mousquet

@Minato I guess our own take as Fr citizens is pretty pointless here, though.

No it's not, because its shows the "soft power" of a city.
If the city is pretty much a void of any reputation (even if this reputation is not necessarily accurate), it means that the city doesn't exist in the mind of many people and it's problem if the city want to become a world class city.

For most people outside the US, Atlanta is an American city like any other and they can't differentiate it from other cities, it doesn't have any particular point for them.

The fact that very few American TV series or movie are set in Atlanta shows that something is lacking.

I was pretty suprised to see how small and quite low profile is the Martin Luther King museum. He is famous figure all over the world and yet few people are even aware that Atlanta was his home city.

Atlanta is still a relatively new city, building a reputation takes times.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Everybody loves the center city now. They hate the taxes, politicians, and corruption, of course. But the actual environment of the city (cityscape, entertainment, culture, dining) is an unstoppable force that the burbs have zero hope of competing with. You simply fall in line and hope that you have good train service

I dream of a day when it will be possible to have a vibrant city center somewhere without tons of taxes and corruption. Then again I live in New Jersey so good luck with that.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

The fact that very few American TV series or movie are set in Atlanta shows that something is lacking.

Quite a few movies and TV shows are set in Atlanta (granted, most of them may not air in France).

Even then, I don't think that's the best way to measure the relevance of a city.

[ThePhun1]

That dog gone Tyler Perry.

[jd3189]

I'm in Atlanta right now and used to live here ten years ago. Right now the downtown area has a lot of potential. If the city continues to grow from the core to surrounding areas, it will be a unique urban experience. It's already a pretty unique experience. I have some low quality pics I will post later.

[isaidso]

Canadians are more familiar with Atlanta. We'd know the Atlanta Braves, Atlanta Hawks, and that Gone With the Wind was partly set there. We might remember the 1996 Atlanta Olympics and that CNN and Coca Cola are based there. So quite a few things but it doesn't seem to translate into people wanting to visit. Very few Canadians have ever been to Atlanta.

Atlanta may become a more important US city over time but it could just as easily remain inconsequential beyond the US.

[Tuckerman]

Atlanta city has changed very significantly in the past 10-20 years. The Buckhead area has developed numerous high rise apartments and is gradually losing its so-called "suburban" feel; the Midtown area ha transformed and continues transform into an urban landscape. The so-called "Downtown" has not changed as much, but it is now transforming and appears to be the new area for investment. At the current rate of growth and development Atlanta will never reach the "levels" of LA, NYC or Chicago within the next 50 years. It will become an increasingly important American and global city.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Tuckerman

Atlanta city has changed very significantly in the past 10-20 years. The Buckhead area has developed numerous high rise apartments and is gradually losing its so-called "suburban" feel; the Midtown area ha transformed and continues transform into an urban landscape. The so-called "Downtown" has not changed as much, but it is now transforming and appears to be the new area for investment. At the current rate of growth and development Atlanta will never reach the "levels" of LA, NYC or Chicago within the next 50 years. It will become an increasingly important American and global city.

I think you inadvertently included a word in there that doesn't belong.

[Tuckerman]

Prediction, over the next 5 decades: NYC will remain the dominant North American city in most every category (it is hard to see the global dominance of NYC, London, Tokyo being eclipsed too much, although the rise of Shanghai and Beijing have yet to be considered and London's decline with Brexit). In North America, Toronto, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta will probably be much more important cities than now. Chicago is in eclipse, but will still be a major city. LA will maintain stable slow growth. Of course this is speculative, based on the dynamics and population shifts and migrations of the past 30 years, but there is little chance that the older population centers will have major growth in the future. The 2020 census should be very revealing with regard to population shifts in the USA.

[the urban politician]

^ Population growth need not maketh a global city.

In Chicago’s case: a better built environment (not only buildings but infrastructure investments), an expanded and more cohesive, walkable downtown with higher paying jobs, an enhanced dining and entertainment scene, etc is how you “grow” without growing.

I think too many people are making the mistake of quantifying cities’ success and importance by sheer population levels. It’s a stat of some importance, for sure, but it way way misses the mark on so many elements.

A good analogy is the brain. Sheer brain size is only a gross estimation of intelligence. The most intelligent animals, however, have heavily convoluted brains. Increased surface area, increased complexity.

The complexity and richness of a city makes it more valuable to the world. That’s why San Francisco, a mere 800-ish thousand, is ranked among top tier cities despite its low population. Sunbelt cities are nowhere near having this and are probably never going to achieve this based on their extreme auto-orientation.

[mhays]

San Francisco is 8,000,000, not 800,000.

London's 1990s population of 10,000 (pre-merger) wasn't a limit either. They always got to count the whole metro equivalent.

[Tuckerman]

[QUOTE=the urban politician;7983018]^ Population growth need not maketh a global city.


I totally agree and would not equate population growth and size alone as what makes a great city. After all, Venice, with fewer than a 100,000 residents is by any definition a "great" city and a "global" city. Nonetheless, there is a correlation between city size and importance that cannot be discounted, particularly in the case of cities in advanced economies.

In addition, past histories of significant and still active institutions play a key role in defining what makes a city great. For example, compare the Chicago Symphony (CSO) with the Atlanta (ASO). Both are excellent symphonies, but the CSO has built, over many decades, a world renowned symphony. It is doubtful that even if Chicago fails to grow much population in the future that the CSO will be diminished in stature. However, the ASO, already excellent, is steadily improving and will probably gain more stature over the years; population increase may play a role. One could use many other institutional examples.

Many others would argue (I am not among them) that economic considerations are the most important defining factors in what makes city great. In this case, population size may be a more important factor, especially if that growth is the result of major business and industrial relocations.


In short, I agree that when we consider "levels" of comparison we need to be much more specific about what we are comparing.