Atlanta's journey toward true urbanization

[jayden]

Atlanta has made significant strides toward urbanization but severely lacks the mobility and urban feel that some of it's peers have. It seems as though the biggest issue has been sprawl which doesn't seem to be going away soon.

Nevertheless, the center city is currently experiencing a boom in population and development.

What are some other things the City of Atlanta can do to reach it's goal of true urbanization?

[MolsonExport]

get rid of the huge highway interchanges right in the heart of the city. I know that isn't going to happen, but it is a huge scar

[mhays]

Limiting outward sprawl can do wonders. It's tough depending on the state politics (maybe implausible here) but any progress can be worth it. When sprawl is even moderately curtailed, infill becomes more attractive in comparison. And infill tends to beget more infill.

I don't know the parking requirements for Atlanta or its region. But dropping requirements in core areas and limiting them elsewhere can benefit the existing car-less population while gently encouraging others to join them. The more people walking, biking, or using transit, the more everything from infrastructure to retail will shift to serve them.

That's just two for now.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by mhays

Limiting outward sprawl can do wonders. It's tough depending on the state politics (maybe implausible here) but any progress can be worth it. When sprawl is even moderately curtailed, infill becomes more attractive in comparison. And infill tends to beget more infill.

If it’s not built dense the first time around, it’s a Herculean task to increase density.

Just to put it in perspective: even after losing 2/3 of its population, Detroit is still unquestionably a denser city than Atlanta. At its peak, Detroit had density on par with Chicago.

City of Atlanta:
2019 Population- 506,811
City Land Area- 135.73 sq miles

City of Detroit:
2019 Population- 670,031
City Land Area- 138.72 sq miles

City of Chicago:
2019 Population- 2,693,976
City Land Area- 227.41 sq miles


New York and parts of San Francisco are just about the only American cities that significantly increased density by building large multi-unit buildings.

Every other city achieves density through smaller plats with mostly single-family, duplexes and triplexes.

Atlanta would have to replat the city, forbid sprawl, make dense construction as of right, and centralize metro jobs so that 1 million+ people find it essential to live densely.

[NYbyWAYofGA]

I am in agreement with all of the suggestions so far. Parking minimums definitely need to be eliminated. Most housing, even within the perimeter is single family and built on these big plots with large front yards. That type of housing is still being built very close to the core. The city would need to start ramping up multifamily and mixed use development even more than it already has. The Beltline has done wonders by providing an amazing opportunity for the city to "retrofit" itself, connect many neighborhoods within the core directly and open up the option for increased mass transit between those neighborhoods via streetcar. Which brings me to my final suggestion, mass transit. Though the city has been making strides in mass transit, the city's culture is mainly car centric. Hopefully, with the Beltline, more bike lanes, street car extensions providing links to and from MARTA, the car centric culture will begin to change. Overall, I think that Atlanta is moving in the right direction and it's a very exciting time for the city.

[Doady]

Cities don't exist in isolation. People come into the city and need parking pace, and people living in the city might need a car to get outside the city. So the already immense sprawl and continued outward growth surrounding it will continue to be the main thing limiting Atlanta's ability to urbanize. The suburbs need to make some effort to increase density and promote transit as well. Such low density and long travel distances prevents a complete regular bus network, and the buses are the main competitor to car in this environment. If they can't even reduce the distances enough to have an environment that can support a complete bus network and shift people from cars to buses, then of course getting people to use rail and biking and walking, which require even higher densities and even shorter distances, is out of the question.

[SIGSEGV]

national $0.50/mile vehicle use tax (in addition to a gas tax) would probably help.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

If it’s not built dense the first time around, it’s a Herculean task to increase density.

...

New York and parts of San Francisco are just about the only American cities that significantly increased density by building large multi-unit buildings.

Every other city achieves density through smaller plats with mostly single-family, duplexes and triplexes.

Atlanta would have to replat the city, forbid sprawl, make dense construction as of right, and centralize metro jobs so that 1 million+ people find it essential to live densely.

I don't agree with this.

Every low-density shopping mall, supermarket, and car dealership is a chance to redevelop in denser form, as those uses can all be in stacked formats. If just six or seven square miles added 20,000 residents per square mile, that's 120-140k.

Likewise, arterials and the edges of commercial and mixed-use districts can be zoned to allow density.

This is how all the West Coast cities are densifying even while the house areas stay relatively static.

[Crawford]

Atlanta is almost certainly the least urban metropolitan center of its size on the planet.

It's basically a giant geography of scattered development in the woods.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Atlanta is almost certainly the least urban metropolitan center of its size on the planet.

Compared to Houston, San Antonio or Phoenix? Nah.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JManc

Compared to Houston, San Antonio or Phoenix? Nah.

Those metros are much denser than Atlanta. You don't feel like you're in the woods right outside downtown Houston.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Those metros are much denser than Atlanta. You don't feel like you're in the woods right outside downtown Houston.

Yeah, with the big caveats that this is 2010 data (I would love to see updated data if it exists), and density can contribute to but does not always equal either functional or aesthetic "urbanism," Phoenix, Houston and San Antonio are all more dense than Atlanta:

https://www.austincontrarian.com/aus...d-density.html

Atlanta did not crack the top 50 US metros in weighted density, again, at least as of 2010.

[mhays]

Where it stands out the most is the endless expanse of extremely-low-density sprawl on the metro fringes.

This is the stuff that can only be slowed via growth management at the state level.

[pdxtex]

Originally Posted by jayden

Atlanta has made significant strides toward urbanization but severely lacks the mobility and urban feel that some of it's peers have. It seems as though the biggest issue has been sprawl which doesn't seem to be going away soon.

Nevertheless, the center city is currently experiencing a boom in population and development.

What are some other things the City of Atlanta can do to reach it's goal of true urbanization?

Its just got the wrong form. Undulating hills and snakey streets. I like it tho. Its kinda slender urbanism

[plinko]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

national $0.50/mile vehicle use tax (in addition to a gas tax) would probably help.

Can you explain further how you think this could be implemented? The average American drives what, 12,000 miles per year? In my house that’s X2. That’s 3X the cost of my property taxes. Seems slightly aggressive to me and I could probably afford it. What about the poor bastard making $50k a year with 2 cars and three kids just trying to survive? $0.10 would seem to make more realistic sense? Would there be exemptions for lower incomes? Commercial trips? Long haul?

I’m honestly curious how something so outwardly expensive looking could actually be put into play.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by plinko

Can you explain further how you think this could be implemented? The average American drives what, 12,000 miles per year? In my house that’s X2. That’s 3X the cost of my property taxes. Seems slightly aggressive to me and I could probably afford it. What about the poor bastard making $50k a year with 2 cars and three kids just trying to survive? $0.10 would seem to make more realistic sense? Would there be exemptions for lower incomes? Commercial trips? Long haul?

I’m honestly curious how something so outwardly expensive looking could actually be put into play.

The IRS reimbursement rate per mile is roughly 50 cents per mile (I just looked it up, it's currently 56 cents as it fluctuates every year, but close enough), which is a rough accounting of the TOC (gas + insurance + maintenance + depreciation) for an "average" vehicle. This would essentially double the cost of driving.

But yes, the point would be to discourage long-distance solo driving and encourage people to either move closer to work or take more sustainable modes of transport like carpooling or public transportation (which could be funded by the same tax). It would certainly be effective in curtailing sprawl (an externality of driving being too cheap), though by no means the only or best solution.

As for trucks, the TOC is probably around $2/mile, so this would not have a huge impact.

[accord1999]

I'd expect any American politician that campaigns on a policy of raising the cost of driving by the equivalent of fuel taxes of $10-$12/gallon will never hold office again.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by accord1999

I'd expect any American politician that campaigns on a policy of raising the cost of driving by the equivalent of fuel taxes of $10-$12/gallon will never hold office again.

Fuel taxes are going to raise increasingly less money as cars are more efficient and the future is electric. A mileage tax is a necessity, though you are right that 50c/mile would be politically unpalatable.

Anyway, back to Atlanta

For it to feel more urban, most of the SFH within city limits will have to be torn down and replaced with denser housing typologies. Right now, Atlanta feels very fragmented, with dense midrise/highrise areas surrounded by seas of SFH.

[strongbad635]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Those metros are much denser than Atlanta. You don't feel like you're in the woods right outside downtown Houston.

Exactly. The portion of Houston that lies inside Loop 610 has a higher population density than Portland, OR. Portland. Oregon.

[jd3189]

Suburban Atlanta does have that city in a forest feel. I think that's why many are drawn to it. Very green and offers good privacy. Suburban Chattanooga and other cities and towns in the Piedmont/ Southern Appalachian area have that same set up.

The best way for the city to increase density would be to start with the immediate core area ( maybe place the connector underground, though it's fun to drive through with the skyline in view despite shitty traffic) and build around the transit nodes near MARTA stations, similar to what DC is doing with the metro out into it's suburbs in NoVA and Maryland.