ATLANTA | Development Thread VI

[ATLMidcity]

How does Atlanta compare to other North American cities when comparing the number of highrise residential buildings (8+ stories, non-stick built)?
Does anyone know of a reliable source where this type of info is readily available?
I'm sure larger cities like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, and Toronto have more residential towers than Atlanta, as well as Miami and Vancouver, but what about other cities?

[Terminus]

Originally Posted by ATLMidcity

Two words: White Flight... Just imagine if all the buildings in Buckhead, Perimeter and Cumberland/Galleria were built in downtown/Midtown - we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Every city in America is currently undergoing an influx of people returning to the original downtowns whether large or small.
Now it is about one word: Gentrification.
Somebody said: "if you don't know your history, you are doomed to repeat it,"

Related to that, Atlanta proper still has fewer residents than it did in 1970, when it reached 496,000. We've almost caught up, but not quite.

[ATLMidcity]

Originally Posted by Terminus

Related to that, Atlanta proper still has fewer residents than it did in 1970, when it reached 496,000. We've almost caught up, but not quite.

Hopefully the 2020 census will show Atlanta as surpassing a half million residents.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by ATLMidcity

How does Atlanta compare to other North American cities when comparing the number of highrise residential buildings (8+ stories, non-stick built)?
Does anyone know of a reliable source where this type of info is readily available?
I'm sure larger cities like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, and Toronto have more residential towers than Atlanta, as well as Miami and Vancouver, but what about other cities?

Atlanta at least in the US has to be in the top 7. I'm positive we have a lot more residential highrise buildings than SF. SF doesn't actually build that many residential highrise buildings(not as much room to build them as Atlanta) and even before this boom, we had a lot of residential highrise buildings in Buckhead. Now Midtown and Buckhead each has dozens and even downtown Atlanta has a few residential high buildings here or there.

[foxmccleod]

Originally Posted by ATLMidcity

How does Atlanta compare to other North American cities when comparing the number of highrise residential buildings (8+ stories, non-stick built)?
Does anyone know of a reliable source where this type of info is readily available?
I'm sure larger cities like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, and Toronto have more residential towers than Atlanta, as well as Miami and Vancouver, but what about other cities?

Try Emporis.com
Here is the Atlanta page. https://www.emporis.com/city/101302/atlanta-ga-usa

[Jacobguy]

Originally Posted by foxmccleod

Try Emporis.com
Here is the Atlanta page. https://www.emporis.com/city/101302/atlanta-ga-usa

Wow, that's a cool page. There's a massive unbuilt but planned tower from the 90's called peachtree triangle it says... I wonder what it was supposed to look like.

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by foxmccleod

Try Emporis.com
Here is the Atlanta page. https://www.emporis.com/city/101302/atlanta-ga-usa

The difference between Canadian and American cities (at least measured by this metric) is quite striking:

Atlanta:

Metro population: 5,910,296
Existing buildings: 691

Toronto:

Metro population: 5,623,400
Existing buildings: 6,691

Vancouver:

Metro population: 2,285,893
Existing buildings: 1,355

Calgary:

Metro population: 1,230,248
Existing buildings: 672

All data from Emporis.

Of course, there are issues with this data (different definitions of metro area and completeness of emporis building counts) and lots of different reasons for the differences. However, the surprising fact remains: for two countries typically thought of as being so similar, the built form of each's cities is quite different.

There are costs and benefits to each country's approach (in my opinion).

[BlueSangha]

It’s about time for another announcement. This thread is getting stale.

[robertjhajek]

Originally Posted by BlueSangha

It’s about time for another announcement. This thread is getting stale.

Lol yes it is. Not exactly a skyscraper, but the proctor creek greenway is coming along very nicely.

http://www.cbs46.com/story/38133896/westsides-proctor-creek-greenway-officially-opens-monday

Super excited to see how this and the new park improve the NW area.

[DNR]

Originally Posted by Reesonov

The difference between Canadian and American cities (at least measured by this metric) is quite striking:

Atlanta:

Metro population: 5,910,296
Existing buildings: 691

Toronto:

Metro population: 5,623,400
Existing buildings: 6,691

Vancouver:

Metro population: 2,285,893
Existing buildings: 1,355

Calgary:

Metro population: 1,230,248
Existing buildings: 672

All data from Emporis.

Of course, there are issues with this data (different definitions of metro area and completeness of emporis building counts) and lots of different reasons for the differences. However, the surprising fact remains: for two countries typically thought of as being so similar, the built form of each's cities is quite different.

There are costs and benefits to each country's approach (in my opinion).

I believe what you listed here “Reesonov” supports my earlier comment better than what I had posted.

There is just simply a higher number of people living closer together in a concentrated area in Canadian cities, thus demanding a higher level of density. It almost seems that density is somehow incentivized in some way either within the development process or there is just a different mentality about living in close proximity to each other within the Canadian culture.

(I suppose Canadians want to bundle up close together to conserve body-heat in the harsh winters.)

I do believe that geographical location – like “Dale” alluded to with the reference to “Isolation-Proximity” would certainly play some role, as well as geographical limitations such as water-ways and mountains (Vancouver) . However, the higher level of density in Canadian cities is obvious as the numbers bares this out.

This may be a good Thesis project if anyone needs one.

[TimCity2000]

here are a couple of pics I took back in January.

[robertjhajek]

Jeez imagine if that highway was a river. Our city would be the best in the country.

[scania]

Originally Posted by ATLMidcity

Two words: White Flight... Just imagine if all the buildings in Buckhead, Perimeter and Cumberland/Galleria were built in downtown/Midtown - we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Every city in America is currently undergoing an influx of people returning to the original downtowns whether large or small.
Now it is about one word: Gentrification.
Somebody said: "if you don't know your history, you are doomed to repeat it,"

Agree with you to some extent. Keep in mind, Midtown was considered to be far away. The IBM Tower was virtually all alone, Colony Square was not close to being an urban building...at least in our standards. I would say IF, the buildings in Midtown, Buckhead, and Perimeter were all in Downtown, that would truly be impressive.The skyline looks great from afar when, when you can incorporate Midtown, and the pics that include Downtown to Buckhead. If you ever watch a Falcons game most of the images they show is only Downtown and we look pretty small as far as the skyline, One could easily say that if simply the Midtown skyscrapers were all Downtown we would have and impressive skyline.

But after another 10 years, we may have a skyline thats filled from Downtown to Buckhead. That would be amazing.

[Hokiehaven]

Originally Posted by DNR

I believe what you listed here “Reesonov” supports my earlier comment better than what I had posted.

There is just simply a higher number of people living closer together in a concentrated area in Canadian cities, thus demanding a higher level of density. It almost seems that density is somehow incentivized in some way either within the development process or there is just a different mentality about living in close proximity to each other within the Canadian culture.

(I suppose Canadians want to bundle up close together to conserve body-heat in the harsh winters.)

I do believe that geographical location – like “Dale” alluded to with the reference to “Isolation-Proximity” would certainly play some role, as well as geographical limitations such as water-ways and mountains (Vancouver) . However, the higher level of density in Canadian cities is obvious as the numbers bares this out.

This may be a good Thesis project if anyone needs one.

I would bet that because there are so few major metro cities in Canada as compared to the US and almost all are on the border or bordering the US, that they are forced to be more dense and of course they have always been job centers even in the age of white flight.

[ATLMidcity]

I'm hoping the MetLife development at 17th and Spring produces a stacked tower consisting of office/hotel and a stand alone apartment tower. We need some height in that part of Midtown.

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by Hokiehaven

I would bet that because there are so few major metro cities in Canada as compared to the US and almost all are on the border or bordering the US, that they are forced to be more dense

I don't really understand this theory. It is not clear to me how the (admittedly low) number of metro areas in Canada or their proximity to the US border would require higher densities? Canada's large metros are not clustered together at all (separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres) and are not any more geographically constrained than most US metros (except Vancouver).

Perhaps you can explain?

[arctk2014]

Originally Posted by ATLMidcity

I'm hoping the MetLife development at 17th and Spring produces a stacked tower consisting of office/hotel and a stand alone apartment tower. We need some height in that part of Midtown.

It's 3 separate towers but I believe some of the parking is underground and shared between all three projects.

[ATLSkyPalaceOwner]

Did anyone attend the DRC?

[Hokiehaven]

Originally Posted by Reesonov

I don't really understand this theory. It is not clear to me how the (admittedly low) number of metro areas in Canada or their proximity to the US border would require higher densities? Canada's large metros are not clustered together at all (separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres) and are not any more geographically constrained than most US metros (except Vancouver).

Perhaps you can explain?

There are so few comparatively and they all are in the southernmost part of the country, warmest. Being close to the U.S. Would be beneficial for business, but I think more, it is a natural barrier for city growth.

[Martinman]

Originally Posted by Hokiehaven

There are so few comparatively and they all are in the southernmost part of the country, warmest. Being close to the U.S. Would be beneficial for business, but I think more, it is a natural barrier for city growth.

Originally Posted by DNR

I believe what you listed here “Reesonov” supports my earlier comment better than what I had posted.

There is just simply a higher number of people living closer together in a concentrated area in Canadian cities, thus demanding a higher level of density. It almost seems that density is somehow incentivized in some way either within the development process or there is just a different mentality about living in close proximity to each other within the Canadian culture.

(I suppose Canadians want to bundle up close together to conserve body-heat in the harsh winters.)

I do believe that geographical location – like “Dale” alluded to with the reference to “Isolation-Proximity” would certainly play some role, as well as geographical limitations such as water-ways and mountains (Vancouver) . However, the higher level of density in Canadian cities is obvious as the numbers bares this out.

This may be a good Thesis project if anyone needs one.

I'm responding in the discussion thread so I don't get yelled at for a non-development conversation.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=8181680#post8181680