More Atlanta skyline comparisons 1990 vs 2007

jfsatlbldr · #1 Posted: **Apr 22, 2007, 3:33 PM**

Two more skylines from April 1990 vs April 2007;

Some more views while we are up there;

Sulley · #2 Posted: **Apr 22, 2007, 4:32 PM**

Awesome... downtown sure is a lot more "green" than it was in 1990.

Coin · #3 Posted: **Apr 22, 2007, 11:57 PM**

how did Atlanta's downtown-midtown-uptown population compare in 1990 versus today?

Andrea · #4 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sulley

Awesome... downtown sure is a lot more "green" than it was in 1990.

There really wasn't any significant change in the downtown skyline after 1991, was there? I'm thinking most of what we see is the product of the huge building boom of the 1960-70's, and the even more astonishing downtown boom in the 1980's. It's great to see things firing up again.

Wonderful photos as always, Joe!

AlabamaGuy2007 · #5 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 1:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sulley

Awesome... downtown sure is a lot more "green" than it was in 1990.

You're completely correct. Even with all the new skyscrapers, it looks like the city got more vegetation.

gttx · #6 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 2:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sulley

Awesome... downtown sure is a lot more "green" than it was in 1990.

The first thing I thought when I saw that 1990 picture of downtown was "wow, there are no trees anywhere!" Glad to see things are improving.

Coin · #7 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 2:51 AM**

...nobody gonna take a stab at my population question?

And by the way, the difference in greenery is mostly an illusion. Downtown now has Centennial Park,which makes a huge difference, but other than that, it's basically the same level of greenery. The 1990 pic is just a bit faded.

sunking1056 · #8 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 3:14 AM**

Quote:

And by the way, the difference in greenery is mostly an illusion. Downtown now has Centennial Park,which makes a huge difference, but other than that, it's basically the same level of greenery

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. The tree canopy in downtown has increased dramatically over the last 20 years due greatly to Trees Atlanta. In fact, Trees Atlanta was originally founded to address the lack of trees in the downtown business district. While it's certainly not a lush forest now by any means, it is definitely better.

atl2phx · #9 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 3:30 AM**

wow, i had no idea about trees atlanta....looks like they've had a real impact. http://www.treesatlanta.org/aboutus.html

Dragonheart8588 · #10 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 3:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atl2phx

wow, i had no idea about trees atlanta....looks like they've had a real impact. http://www.treesatlanta.org/aboutus.html

Trees Atlanta is a great organization. My school organization with another university in Atl helped them plant trees last month on Collier road. It was a great experience and quite fun actually. They always need volunteers.

Andrea · #11 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunking1056

The tree canopy in downtown has increased dramatically over the last 20 years due greatly to Trees Atlanta.

That's one area where we are way ahead of NYC and Chicago:

"Today, New York City has 5.2 million trees, or 24 percent canopy cover. By comparison, Chicago's canopy cover is 11 percent and the rate for Atlanta is 37 percent."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?i...C-RSSFeeds0312

Derek · #12 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 4:03 AM**

very interesting! thanks for sharing!

the changes are incredible

AlabamaGuy2007 · #13 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 3:10 PM**

One way the city could really spear-head all of the pollution that's floating around their air intake is to fund the planting of MORE TREES. The metro area is actually heavily wooded, but, they have a problem with not using the mass transit they have available in the outlying areas like Alpharetta, Roswell, and Gwinett. That is, from what I've seen.

But, the major thing that the cities in North Alabama have done, though not Decatur, Grrrr, is plant Ginkgoe trees. Cities like Florence, Huntsville, even some in Madison have planted these and I've been able to notice a difference. I've seen quite a few in downtown Montgomery too. Anyways, they love the carbon dioxide and are one of the best trees to filter out greenhouse gases. That's why the highways in DC are nasty but the parks are beautiful, cause they have those HUGE Ginkgoes growing around the place.

It works!

gttx · #14 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 4:50 PM**

I'm no arborist, but I would have to say that ginkgos (sp?) are probably one of the most beautiful trees around in the fall - they turn a vibrant, bright yellow. There are a few around the Civil Engineering building at Georgia Tech that are phenomenal. I don't know anything about their efficiency at producing oxygen, but they're pretty nonetheless.

Coin · #15 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 5:10 PM**

I'm not basing my comment on personal experience (I hadn't visited Atlanta in 1990) but rather a picture-to-picture comparison. Centennial Park aside, you can almost count the exact same number of trees in the downtown photos. I'm sure there are many new trees that aren't captured by these photos, but based solely on the pics, I think it's mostly an illusion caused by the brighter, more vivid current photo.

Soooo, still nobody knows the population numbers for downtown/midtown/uptown atlanta in 1990 and 2007???

SteveD · #16 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 5:16 PM**

I wonder if geckos enjoying sunning in ginkgos?

(sorry)

(four 0 four) · #17 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 10:29 PM**

From the looks of all the pictures you posted in the various threads, you really made the rounds on Saturday! Great pictures...every last one of 'em!

smArTaLlone · #18 Posted: **Apr 23, 2007, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coin

I'm not basing my comment on personal experience (I hadn't visited Atlanta in 1990) but rather a picture-to-picture comparison. Centennial Park aside, you can almost count the exact same number of trees in the downtown photos. I'm sure there are many new trees that aren't captured by these photos, but based solely on the pics, I think it's mostly an illusion caused by the brighter, more vivid current photo.

Soooo, still nobody knows the population numbers for downtown/midtown/uptown atlanta in 1990 and 2007???

Look at the lots bordering the park. There are trees that weren't there before.

Coin · #19 Posted: **Apr 24, 2007, 12:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by smArTaLlone

Look at the lots bordering the park. There are trees that weren't there before.

Some spots have more trees and some spots have less. Let's not get technical. I'm just making an observation. I think the big difference is the vibrant colors of the newer pic along with centennial park. I don't think there are actually a ton more trees in that photo than were there before. Granted there are probably TONS more that this particular photo doesn't capture, but that's not what I was talking about.

Oh well, it's not an issue worth debating really. Great trees.

Does ANYBODY live in downtown/midtown/uptown Atlanta? What does it take to get someone to answer my population question? We got 5 million responses on trees and not a single response to a population question.

jfsatlbldr · #20 Posted: **Apr 24, 2007, 2:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coin

I'm not basing my comment on personal experience (I hadn't visited Atlanta in 1990) but rather a picture-to-picture comparison. Centennial Park aside, you can almost count the exact same number of trees in the downtown photos. I'm sure there are many new trees that aren't captured by these photos, but based solely on the pics, I think it's mostly an illusion caused by the brighter, more vivid current photo.

Soooo, still nobody knows the population numbers for downtown/midtown/uptown atlanta in 1990 and 2007???

As i recall based on the 10 yr census; 1990 around 2.9 million, 2000 about 4.1 million, today of course having just past 5 million all figures for the entire metro area however. Remember also that some increase is due to additional smaller populated counties being included respectfully with each census for the metro area. I believe the overall Atlanta city pop. in 1990 was less than 400,000.