74 replies to this topic

[Hybrid0NE]

DaltonGA, on May 7 2007, 04:12 PM, said:

Atlanta's which is approaching the 1970 peak of 497k.

Just wanted to point out... discussing the total population ITP, (not limited to but also) including the city of Atlanta, unincorporated areas (Vinings, Cumberland) and incorporated entities (Decatur, East Point, College Park). It was last estimated to be around 770,000, I assume with the new census it has pushed over 800k at this time.

[DaltonGA]

Hybrid0NE, on May 7 2007, 06:45 PM, said:

Just wanted to point out... discussing the total population ITP, (not limited to but also) including the city of Atlanta, unincorporated areas (Vinings, Cumberland) and incorporated entities (Decatur, East Point, College Park). It was last estimated to be around 770,000, I assume with the new census it has pushed over 800k at this time.

I only mentioned the city's population peak as a comparison to Detroit with a similar land are to point out density. While I didn't mention population, I did mention Decatur, East Point, Brookhaven, etc. It's my understanding that Decatur is the most densely populated municipality within the perimeter and it would have been even denser at its 1960 peak of 22k. Hapeville probably was close when it peaked at 10k in 1960 and could give Decatur a run for the money on density if the Ford assembly plant site is redeveloped as residential.  

While white flight has been mentioned as a cause of declines with in Atlanta and its older ITP suburbs, that is not entirely the cause as often the ones who left were replaced by larger families or the homes were divided into apartments which housed similar numbers. The freeway constructions and airport expansions eliminated numerous residential areas, Mountain View in Clayton was vacated by the city of Atlanta due to noise from Hartsfield. East Point, College Park, Hapeville and a small portion of Atlanta was turned into airport use. Lenox Square and Phipps Plaza made use of land that was largely residential along with other suburban style retail that was built within the perimeter. The land "the Ted" and the of Fulton County stadium used was once residential. Add empty nesting and gentrification in neighborhoods which were repopulation by DINKs and childless yuppies, the number of occupants per household shrank. Decatur, Viriginia Higlands, Ansely Park and portions of Druid Hills all represent empty nesting or gentrification reducing density.

[Hybrid0NE]

Okay, I got you .

Btw... what are DINKS?

[Lady Celeste]

DINKS= Dual Income, No Kids

[ejd3100]

According to what I've read, it is a bit presumptuous to think that Atlanta's suburban population has a lower density than that of ITP.  For instance, Cobb County's population density ranks second in the state, with DeKalb County claiming the first.  Now that Gwinnett is approaching its eastern borders, it's probably safe to say that the 5 main metro counties all have similar population densities.

[atlrvr]

Well the lowest density portion of Fulton is all outside the perimter, so I would be willing to bet if you removed it, Fulton would be the densest, or at least ahead of Cobb.

[DaltonGA]

A good point was raised that Cobb is the second most dense county in the metro, and over 95% of its land area is outside the perimeter. Gwinnett has overtaken DeKalb as the second county in population and is entirely OTP. Clayton is one the metros smallest counties in land area and has one of the highest densities, the only large area left belown Jonesboro, and has an even smaller area ITP.  As for Fulton, South Fulton is the only low density part of the county. North Fulton is rapidly filling in, Sandy Springs(majority north of the perimeter), Roswell, Alpharetta, Johns Creek and Milton occupy the majority of the land area. Alpharetta, Johns Creek and Milton have a great deal of land that is low density, with Alpharetta and Johns Creek increasingly getting denser. Milton incoroporated with the principle of maintaining low density that is shared with the remaining of unincorporated North Fulton. Chattahoochee Hill Country used maintaining low density as a platforn for incorpation, along with a local voice and control of development. The perimeter became obselete as a boundary for urban growth by the early 70's.

Virtually all of the residential areas ITP are suburban in nature and share density with the 50-70's suburban growth that occurred in Cobb and Clayton OTP and the 70's to present suburban growth in Gwinnett and North Fulton. Small land areas of Georgia counties have resulted in several non-core counties having high average densities-Douglas, Fayette, Rockdale, Newton, Barrow, Spalding and Forsyth are among Georgia's most densely populated and Henry,  Paulding, and Walton are well on their way to joing the density list.  Cherokee, Bartow, Coweta and Carroll have relatively large land areas coupled with sizable and growing population. Beyond these counties come nine low density counties that could sustain a great deal of growth with becoming dense and large in population for several decades to come.

Also, the perimeter entered the city of Atlanta on the west side and stayed close in its pass across the Tri-cities, thus some of the core was always OTP. The metro grew to include areas that are were already developing around a strong county seat. Cartersville-Bartow, Griffin-Spalding, Carrollton-Carroll, Newnan-Coweta, Covington-Newton, etc. already had a strong employment base, population growth, and retail development when they were absorbed into the metro area during the 1970's and 80's. Only Haralson, Meriwether, Pike, Lamar, Butts, Pickens, Dawson, Heard, and Jasper counties are extensively rural and anyone who has ventured up 400 into Dawson and 575/515 into Pickens can see the suburbanization taken place there.

[ryanmckibben]

I don't see the fascination with density. Density in and of itself is a horrible way to try and extrapolate what the feel of an area may be. LA is the highest density city in the nation, but if you are looking for an urban environment, any pre WWII city will be a much better match. High density does not equal urban, that is why people like Randal O'Tool and Wendell Cox are technically right when they say that increased density will only cause more traffic congestion. Craming a lot of suburban style development into a small area and saying it is better then one acre min lot size is dubious at best. In order to really see the benefit of density it must also be urban in form.

Edited by ryanmckibben, 29 July 2007 - 03:22 PM.

[Savboy08]

Spartan, on Mar 20 2005, 02:25 PM, said:

Its about half of the population though. GA has roughly 8 million citizens- of which about 4 million (for the slower folks, that's half) live in the Atlanta metro.

How many of those 28 counties have any part of it within the perimeter? Fulton, Dekalb, parts of Cobb and Henry? Its mostly 2 counties that have that 787,000. I'd says that is a good number considering how spread out Atlanta is.

I think in terms of geographical area, Atlanta MSA/CSA is on its way to taking up close to 1/3-1/2 of Georgia.

[Martinman]

Savboy08, on Aug 6 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

I think in terms of geographical area, Atlanta MSA/CSA is on its way to taking up close to 1/3-1/2 of Georgia.

Its nowhere near that much.  Currently the Atlanta MSA is around 1/7th of the state land area.

Edited by Martinman, 06 August 2007 - 10:03 AM.

[Hybrid0NE]

bump

[Lady Celeste]

HybridOne is there something that you would like for us to discuss....anything is better than talking about Lenox or Phipps.

[Hybrid0NE]

Lady Celeste, on Aug 27 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

HybridOne is there something that you would like for us to discuss....anything is better than talking about Lenox or Phipps.

LOL. Anyone got updated Census stats on the ITP population? It's been 2 years since we got an update.

[Lady Celeste]

Yes, I would be curious to know the updated number as well....especially considering the numbers by which most intown neighborhoods have been growing.

Edited by Lady Celeste, 28 August 2009 - 09:36 PM.

[Spartan]

I came up with that 770,000 figure back in 2005, and it was using data from the 2000 census. The only way for me to do the same calculation is when the 2010 census geographical data is available, which will not be until the spring of 2011.