Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I bet the hundreds of thousands of people are sick of being stuck in traffic like I am when I'm on those interstates.
Ah, so there's the real problem....if you are an urban dweller and live in the core and use mass transit, you wouldn't need the interstates. But you want cars off the road so that when you decide that you want to use them, it's more convenient for you. How philanthropic.
Sorry to tell you, but making the city more dense wouldn't necessarily limit the pollution. In fact, it would be even less healthy because then you would have a higher concentration of pollution in the middle of the town and more people would be there to breathe it in. If you have more density, you are by definition going to have more pollution in the dense area. However, pollution is also largely dictated by weather conditions, which is why our pollution is so much worse in the summer months. It's not like there are less pollution producing devices in the winter, there just isn't as much humidity or atmospheric pressure to keep it in. Wind also plays a large role, which is why some tiny desert towns in California have terrible air even though they don't produce any pollution. All of Los Angeles' smog just blows over to them.
Anyway, if you are serious about controlling pollution, trying to get cars off the road can help, but not in a terribly meaningful way. If you are really interested in doing something meaningful, you could lobby the government to stop the emmission exception for diesel powered engines so all those trucks that happily puff black smoke into the air would have to stop. Or you could try to get Georgia Power, the worst polluting utility in the United States, to clean up their plants. Or you could figure out a way to address the biggest secret of Atlanta's pollution: airplanes, which are tremendously horrible pollutants and come and go from Hartsfield every minute. All of these would have much more meaningful results than attacking cars, which are relatively clean burning nowadays and getting better all the time. Airplanes and power plants haven't improved their emmissions in years.
Your problems with suburban living have nothing to do with these issues, because you could do much more to stop them that you're not doing. You're just a self-important urbanite who wants to espouse your beliefs on others because they must be right.
They are also part of one gigantic metropolitan area.
And again, they have densified their cores so they have to build out. If Atlanta already had an extremely dense core and had no room to build anything, then I can understand the need for more and more sprawl.
Last I checked, Manhattan didn't have anymore room to densifiy meanwhile downtown Atlanta has numerous parking lots and uninhabited structures that ca be torn down for more projects.
So now you're comparing Atlanta to NYC......and I'm not a fan of tearing down to rebuild. I like what Atlanta is doing right - building infill in the core. You can't deny that it's happening, but someone who loves to complain may not want to admit it.
Boston is no more a gigantic metropolitan area than Atlanta is, and it's core is about the same percentage of it's metro area. See, all American cities have many of the same issues for which you want to single out Atlanta.
Ah, so there's the real problem....if you are an urban dweller and live in the core and use mass transit, you wouldn't need the interstates. But you want cars off the road so that when you decide that you want to use them, it's more convenient for you. How philanthropic.
Sorry to tell you, but making the city more dense wouldn't necessarily limit the pollution. In fact, it would be even less healthy because then you would have a higher concentration of pollution in the middle of the town and more people would be there to breathe it in. If you have more density, you are by definition going to have more pollution in the dense area. However, pollution is also largely dictated by weather conditions, which is why our pollution is so much worse in the summer months. It's not like there are less pollution producing devices in the winter, there just isn't as much humidity or atmospheric pressure to keep it in. Wind also plays a large role, which is why some tiny desert towns in California have terrible air even though they don't produce any pollution. All of Los Angeles' smog just blows over to them.
Anyway, if you are serious about controlling pollution, trying to get cars off the road can help, but not in a terribly meaningful way. If you are really interested in doing something meaningful, you could lobby the government to stop the emmission exception for diesel powered engines so all those trucks that happily puff black smoke into the air would have to stop. Or you could try to get Georgia Power, the worst polluting utility in the United States, to clean up their plants. Or you could figure out a way to address the biggest secret of Atlanta's pollution: airplanes, which are tremendously horrible pollutants and come and go from Hartsfield every minute. All of these would have much more meaningful results than attacking cars, which are relatively clean burning nowadays and getting better all the time. Airplanes and power plants haven't improved their emmissions in years.
Your problems with suburban living have nothing to do with these issues, because you could do much more to stop them that you're not doing. You're just a self-important urbanite who wants to espouse your beliefs on others because they must be right.
Atlanta urban core does not have everything I need and I have to use interstates to go to friend's house and attractions that aren't in the core. Atlanta does not have everything in the metropolitan area. That's the problem with it. Do you not get it? If I was in NYC, I would use the SUBWAYS to get to places I need to go. Do you still not get it yet?
Atlanta is car-centric so at some point, you MUST use a car to get to a place you want. Simple as that.
I really don't have a choice to move out of here YET, but trust me, I will in a few years once I'm done with college and find a job. I personally don't like driving and gas prices are just too crazy these days. Using transit would be much cheaper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeTarheel
So now you're comparing Atlanta to NYC......and I'm not a fan of tearing down to rebuild. I like what Atlanta is doing right - building infill in the core. You can't deny that it's happening, but someone who loves to complain may not want to admit it.
Boston is no more a gigantic metropolitan area than Atlanta is, and it's core is about the same percentage of it's metro area. See, all American cities have many of the same issues for which you want to single out Atlanta.
If i were living in Dallas, I would raise the same issues.
Atlanta urban core does not have everything I need and I have to use interstates to go to friend's house and attractions that aren't in the core. Atlanta does not have everything in the metropolitan area. That's the problem with it. Do you not get it? If I was in NYC, I would use the SUBWAYS to get to places I need to go. Do you still not get it yet?
Atlanta is car-centric so at some point, you MUST use a car to get to a place you want. Simple as that.
I really don't have a choice to move out of here YET, but trust me, I will in a few years once I'm done with college and find a job. I personally don't like driving and gas prices are just too crazy these days. Using transit would be much cheaper.
If i were living in Dallas, I would raise the same issues.
Well, if you continue to compare Atlanta (or most any other city) to NYC then you will continue to be frustrated and disappointed. It's a "glass half empty" situation in which you will never be satisfied. If that's how you choose to be then okay - I choose a different stance.
Well, if you continue to compare Atlanta (or most any other city) to NYC then you will continue to be frustrated and disappointed. It's a "glass half empty" situation in which you will never be satisfied. If that's how you choose to be then okay - I choose a different stance.
Because NYC is the perfect example and balance of everything I praise. Obv, no city will even come close to it in the next 50-75 years or even more.
Chicago, LA, D.C., Seattle, and other cities are pretty great too.
Sorry you dislike it here so much Ant. I haven't read everything you have written, but you seem to focus on what you perceive as negative about Atlanta and don't realize what it is about Atlanta that people like.
Cost of living, an abundance of space, personal freedom... to name a few. People have been moving here by the boatloads to escape the density, cost, and urbanity of NYC. People are not wrong for wanting that.
NYC is an awesome and enviable town in many ways. I love visiting there, it is probably the greatest city on earth. But I don't think I would want to live there for any significant period of time. I truly love what Atlanta has to offer. I can affordably have my own personal space that no one can f with. For the price of some craptastic Clayton County style 1978 split level house on a 1/4 acre, 1+ hour outside of NYC it would cost me $300k. For that same price I can have a 3000 sq ft house on 11 acres of beautiful pastoral land with a lake less than an hour outside of town.
People have to make sacrifices. Many people, especially as they get older, find living on top of one another to suck quite hard. They would rather hop in their car and leave when they want rather than wait to pack in a tube like a buncha sardines. People in Atlanta are not wrong for wanting to live the way they do. I do love to see infill but all this talk of density as if it is the supreme goal is just silly.
I guess what I am trying to say is don't try to make Atlanta out to be some place that just has it wrong or hasn't figured it out yet. I look forward to improvements in transit, but it will never be as vast as NYC or Chicago, mostly due to historical and geographical factors. But also because people just don't want to live that way here. It's a preference and there is nothing wrong with it.
That's the problem with it. Do you not get it? If I was in NYC, I would use the SUBWAYS to get to places I need to go.
I know we aren't supposed to lob personal insults on this board, but you are a fool.
Do you really think that even in almighty Manhattan that you never ever need to ride in a car? Of course you do. You cited that you have to drive here to visit friends. Well, in New York you might have friends you want to visit that don't live by a Subway station just like here. Sure, you could associate only with people who live in Manhattan, but you can also associate only with people that live by MARTA here. Same thing.
There is also plenty you need a car for in New York. New York has Costco, Ikea, etc., but how do you suppose you are going to get that new bed, dresser, or frozen bag of chicken back home? Are you going to lug it on a subway? Yeah, you can live in New York, but you're never ever going to get away from cars completely.
I don't know if you were beaten up by suburban bullies as a child, if you have some kind of urban planning professor that passed on evil suburban attitudes, or what, but if you are a college student you really haven't lived on your own enough to fully understand the pros and cons of urban vs. suburban vs. rural.
But you should go out and learn. If you love New York, Chicago, LA (certainly don't need a car there!), DC, and Seattle, what are you doing here? They all have fine colleges and universities. At least you should move to New York when you graduate.
I know we aren't supposed to lob personal insults on this board, but you are a fool.
Do you really think that even in almighty Manhattan that you never ever need to ride in a car? Of course you do. You cited that you have to drive here to visit friends. Well, in New York you might have friends you want to visit that don't live by a Subway station just like here. Sure, you could associate only with people who live in Manhattan, but you can also associate only with people that live by MARTA here. Same thing.
There is also plenty you need a car for in New York. New York has Costco, Ikea, etc., but how do you suppose you are going to get that new bed, dresser, or frozen bag of chicken back home? Are you going to lug it on a subway? Yeah, you can live in New York, but you're never ever going to get away from cars completely.
I don't know if you were beaten up by suburban bullies as a child, if you have some kind of urban planning professor that passed on evil suburban attitudes, or what, but if you are a college student you really haven't lived on your own enough to fully understand the pros and cons of urban vs. suburban vs. rural.
But you should go out and learn. If you love New York, Chicago, LA (certainly don't need a car there!), DC, and Seattle, what are you doing here? They all have fine colleges and universities. At least you should move to New York when you graduate.
BTW, have you ever even been to New York?
I have family that live in New York so of course I've been to New York. I've been around a good part of this country...LA, Chicago, Seattle, Miami to name a few. I've been to about 4 of China's largest cities including Shanghai and Hong Kong for a ambassador program in highschool so I definitely know what urban monsters are.
It's much cheaper to stay on HOPE here and get your college paid for then it is to attempt to get the limited scholarships and still pay wads of money to go out of state.
I don't care about what happens in the suburbs...I've been saying that Atlanta needs to focus on it's core...I hate the suburbs and I know you know that by now. This doesn't mean I think everyone should live in urban environments rofl. What makes you think I think that?
I want Atlanta in it's core to densify as well as provide more transportation options to and from the city. In fact, that would HELP the suburbs, not hurt it.
The suburbs can stay the way they are. I don't care about them either way.
And I KNOW people that have rarely use a car. Rare. It's very rare meaning traffic hardly affects them like it does here in Atlanta. You are over exaggerating to prove a point.
You get furniture once every 1-2 years or so? I mean really..come up with something better then that. That's a terrible example. We're not talking everyday like people drive here in Atlanta.
Explain why more then half the city uses public transportation as oppose to driving in New york.
This doesn't mean I think everyone should live in urban environments rofl. What makes you think I think that?
Because you said this:
Quote:
Suburban is ok but the method in which the suburbs are constructed is not ok
Since you said the way the suburbs are constructed is not ok, that makes it sound like you are against the idea of them altogether for anybody, not just a personal choice for you not to like them. But maybe that's not quite what you meant by that.
Quote:
I want Atlanta in it's core to densify as well as provide more transportation options to and from the city. In fact, that would HELP the suburbs, not hurt it.
I don't think many people would really argue this point. Although, it always fascinates me why people who are already urban dwellers care so much that mass transit goes to the suburbs. If anything, you should want more intown stops so its easier for you to get around. Why would you care if it goes to the suburbs if you hate them so much? Just to visit friends and family who live in them? I've lived in the city and the suburbs, and even though when I lived in the city I could walk to a MARTA station, I hardly ever used it. I really didn't care if it was there or not, but now that I'm in the suburbs, I really would love for mass transit to come where I am now. It seems to me that suburbanites should be bigger boosters of mass transit than city dwellers. Despite a lot of the things I've said on this board, I'm actually a huge fan of mass transit. I just don't think MARTA particularly does a very good job with it. I don't want to open that can of worms in this thread, I'm just saying that I don't understand why someone like you would care so much if mass transit came to the suburbs, but I care deeply about that.
Quote:
You get furniture once every 1-2 years or so? I mean really..come up with something better then that. That's a terrible example.
Yeah, maybe that was a terrible example. What about just your regular grocery needs? Relying on mass transit, you're really limited to the number of bags you can legitimately carry in one trip. And the same goes for anything, any time you purchase anything that is too large to carry around on a subway, you will find yourself taking a cab or renting a car. That pretty much eliminates shopping at Costco altogether, especially since they don't even give you bags. The point I'm trying to make is that even in New York, you are unlikely to be able to rely on public transportation all the time exclusively.
Quote:
Explain why more then half the city uses public transportation as oppose to driving in New york.
Well, I don't think it's because New Yorkers are overly concerned with saving the environment or are consciously trying to protect their urban core. It's really more practical than that. People in New York use public transportation because the cost of owning a car is ridiculous there. Parking is extremely expensive and a lot of the time traffic is so bad that you wast too much time on the road and driving through the muck is stressful. Many very wealthy people who can affort it, though, do have cars. If there was plenty of free, or even cheap parking in New York, I bet you would see car ownership go way up.
Since you said the way the suburbs are constructed is not ok, that makes it sound like you are against the idea of them altogether for anybody, not just a personal choice for you not to like them. But maybe that's not quite what you meant by that.
I don't think many people would really argue this point. Although, it always fascinates me why people who are already urban dwellers care so much that mass transit goes to the suburbs. If anything, you should want more intown stops so its easier for you to get around. Why would you care if it goes to the suburbs if you hate them so much? Just to visit friends and family who live in them? I've lived in the city and the suburbs, and even though when I lived in the city I could walk to a MARTA station, I hardly ever used it. I really didn't care if it was there or not, but now that I'm in the suburbs, I really would love for mass transit to come where I am now. It seems to me that suburbanites should be bigger boosters of mass transit than city dwellers. Despite a lot of the things I've said on this board, I'm actually a huge fan of mass transit. I just don't think MARTA particularly does a very good job with it. I don't want to open that can of worms in this thread, I'm just saying that I don't understand why someone like you would care so much if mass transit came to the suburbs, but I care deeply about that.
Yeah, maybe that was a terrible example. What about just your regular grocery needs? Relying on mass transit, you're really limited to the number of bags you can legitimately carry in one trip. And the same goes for anything, any time you purchase anything that is too large to carry around on a subway, you will find yourself taking a cab or renting a car. That pretty much eliminates shopping at Costco altogether, especially since they don't even give you bags. The point I'm trying to make is that even in New York, you are unlikely to be able to rely on public transportation all the time exclusively.
Well, I don't think it's because New Yorkers are overly concerned with saving the environment or are consciously trying to protect their urban core. It's really more practical than that. People in New York use public transportation because the cost of owning a car is ridiculous there. Parking is extremely expensive and a lot of the time traffic is so bad that you wast too much time on the road and driving through the muck is stressful. Many very wealthy people who can affort it, though, do have cars. If there was plenty of free, or even cheap parking in New York, I bet you would see car ownership go way up.
Actually, re-read this thead. I didn't say that. It was another person. Please don't mis-quote me. I'm not going to even bother reading the rest because your whole point became invalidated when you pulled a quote that I didn't even say.
And you're here calling me a fool?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...and I'm not a fan of tearing down to rebuild. I like what Atlanta is doing right - building infill in the core. You can't deny that it's happening, but someone who loves to complain may not want to admit it. 
