Atlanta Streetcar (Downtown Loop) progress (Sandy Springs, Dunwoody: unemployed, taxis, cost of)

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by ATLondoner

Sorry, I have no knowledge of Camden, NJ.

But to your second point.....personally I use Marta (or public transport) when I know that I'll be going out to drink.

Or if i know traffic will be sucky....say trying to get to an evening Braves game from Buckhead.

So that means you don't ride it to work? Or use it for errands? That's generally what people are using it for. How many people do you think are going to decide to leave the car at home and take a streetcar or MARTA on a daily basis? And why is there so much focus on building around streetcar lines when there are heavy rail lines (which are superior in pretty much every way) that the city's not building around?

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

[/font][/color]

Streetcars are inanimate objects (when not in transit, of course). I have about as much animosity towards streetcars as I have towards mustard.



What other forum have I discussed streetcars in other than the DC forum (where I used to live) and the Urban Planning forum (where it's a regular topic)?



The streetcar is nowhere in sight for the McMillan development in DC. Yet that's not stopping them from building 8-10 story condo buildings. And of course it's not since the city is sinking its own cash into the development! I mean, if development is the city's top priority, then just provide the incentives to develop. You don't need a streetcar to do that. Besides, you don't really have to go twisting developers' arms to get them to build condos within a half mile radius of the U.S. Capitol Building. What are they going to say? "Oh no, we can't build these condos without a streetcar. We'd only get $700,000 for them!"



A single streetcar also costs much more than a single bus and has no mobility advantages. They get stuck in traffic just like buses do.



Heavy rail is an entirely different ball game. Streetcars provide no mobility advantage over buses. If your goal is to get a lot of people somewhere quickly, then a streetcar ain't gonna do it.

D.C.'s streetcars are going to have their own lanes in congested areas. They will not get stuck in traffic. Infact, DDOT is taking traffic lanes from cars for them. Just a little inside info on the subject. You will see soon enough, it's about to become very difficult to drive in D.C. over the next few years.

As for McMillian, the site won't be built for another 5 years and the promise of streetcars are the only reason they will be able to build high-rises. You already know you are not allowed to build anything over 6 stories in D.C. without adequate rail transit. That means it can be built prior to the actual development of the rail transit as long as it resides in the appropriate zone the rail transit will be built in. Sometimes there is stipulation that holds off future phases till the project is started but that has more to do with NIMBY demands. You know just as well as I do that no building in D.C. can be built at 8+ stories unless it is near current rail transit or planned rail transit. This city is over the top when it comes to shadow's on their yards.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

But you could have gotten the same thing by simply zoning for high density and giving tax abatements/credits. You could have all of that without investing in a mode of transit that's more sentimental than practical.

It's going to be very practical for me.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

D.C.'s streetcars are going to have their own lanes in congested areas. They will not get stuck in traffic. Infact, DDOT is taking traffic lanes from cars for them. Just a little inside info on the subject. You will see soon enough, it's about to become very difficult to drive in D.C. over the next few years.

Let's keep in mind that this thread is about the Atlanta streetcar, not DC streetcar. But to address your point, there is no way in Sam Hell that streetcars along most thoroughares will have a dedicated lane. That's pure fantasy that only the most gullible streetcar enthusiasts would ever believe.

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

As for McMillian, the site won't be built for another 5 years and the promise of streetcars are the only reason they will be able to build high-rises.

That's not what's driving that development. It has nothing do with streetcars. There have been various proposals to develop high density towers at that site going back to the Barry and Kelly administrations. They've just all fallen through due to local opposition. If the streetcar project got cancelled today in toto, they'd still be pushing that project because DC's Deputy Chief of Economic Development used to work for the master developer. That project is about cronyism; it's not about adhering to priniciples of good urban design.

[ATLondoner]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

So that means you don't ride it to work? Or use it for errands? That's generally what people are using it for. How many people do you think are going to decide to leave the car at home and take a streetcar or MARTA on a daily basis? And why is there so much focus on building around streetcar lines when there are heavy rail lines (which are superior in pretty much every way) that the city's not building around?

I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at....if there was an extended network that connected more places with more convenient stops (more frequently), of course I and I'm sure many more people would use it more often.

From reading another thread it seems as though MARTA are now (retrospectively) trying to build up areas in the close vicinity to some of their stations.

[bfarley30]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

But you could have gotten the same thing by simply zoning for high density and giving tax abatements/credits. You could have all of that without investing in a mode of transit that's more sentimental than practical.

I wouldn't be suprised if this is already the case and this area hasn't just exploded with condos and businesses.

Originally Posted by MattCW

And how would people have reached this special district? Businesses can't survive without customers, and the streetcar will ensure car-free access by people to the location. Bus routes can be yanked at a moment's notice.

This is exactly right, look at the 40 plus routes MARTA cut just a few years ago.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

They drive to them...just like people drive to Georgetown or Adams-Morgan in Washington, DC, which do not have transit lines (other than buses). If people are that pressed to ride transit, they could ride a bus there just as people do who visit Georgetown or Adams-Morgan. The last time I checked, a bus was considered a viable mode of transportation.

Here in the ATL people are trying to get folks OUT of their cars and no matter what people say buses are not as widely accepted as a preffered mode of transit over any type of rail. Buses are looked at as low class unless they are running every 2-3 minutes apart.

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

Just a little inside information for you, DDOT in Washington D.C. is purposely making it difficult to drive in the city to push people into modes other than the automobile.

This is actually something I proposed in a recent blog on City-Data for the Peachtree streetcar and how to make it work:
Let's Talk About the Peachtree Streetcar

[cqholt]

Some people feel buses are not as static as streetcars, since their routes can change with a vote by the board. Streetcars are seen as more permanent, because of the rails in the street. Also, streetcars allow riders to see the street level retail, get off at the next stop and walk to the business. Money and people folk to streetcar lines.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by ATLondoner

I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at....if there was an extended network that connected more places with more convenient stops (more frequently), of course I and I'm sure many more people would use it more often.

You just said you ride it when you go out drinking. I just wanted to know if you used it for anything else. It might make sense to ride MARTA to a Braves game where traffic and parking is a hassle, but it probably doesn't make as much sense to ride MARTA to the Cheesecake Factory in Buckhead where they have free valet. What's the point of using transit when you can reach your destination faster via car (and sometimes cheaper)?

Originally Posted by ATLondoner

From reading another thread it seems as though MARTA are now (retrospectively) trying to build up areas in the close vicinity to some of their stations.

There's a parking lot directly in front of the Arts Center station.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by alco89

It's "fine" but it's not all that and rapidly becoming obsolete. The main problem is it can't make enough money for several reasons. New Orleans is a totally different situation because it is known for being a huge tourist destination. Atlanta doesn't quite have that unfortunately. Even still, the Superdome did go through a large renovation project worth $336 million. And no, it wasn't all for the roof:
The Mercedes-Benz Superdome - 2011 Enhancements

So instead of using $200 million to improve the area and make the entire area attractive to tourists, they're going to go for a single huge investment that won't even bring anything new in? $200 million could fund a LOT of improvements around Five Points and Underground to help turn the area around.

Oh, you're gonna love this answer: MONEY. The Dome doesn't have the luxury boxes (apparently) or the right contract deals to make enough money for Blank. This is part of the reason why the Falcons aren't worth as much as most other teams in the league.
Football's Most Valuable Teams - Forbes

Except that will be money that goes to pure private hands. So no improvement for Atlanta from that.

I'm not arguing this point any further. This new stadium will be better for Atlanta. Period.

No, sorry. Better for Mr. Blank does not equal better for Atlanta.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

You just said you ride it when you go out drinking. I just wanted to know if you used it for anything else. It might make sense to ride MARTA to a Braves game where traffic and parking is a hassle, but it probably doesn't make as much sense to ride MARTA to the Cheesecake Factory in Buckhead where they have free valet. What's the point of using transit when you can reach your destination faster via car (and sometimes cheaper)?

So let's build out the transit then so it becomes easier and faster to reach your destination via transit. Your argument is essentially this: people don't use it now because it doesn't exist, so that means they won't use it once it exists.

There's a parking lot directly in front of the Arts Center station.

So?

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by bfarley30

Here in the ATL people are trying to get folks OUT of their cars and no matter what people say buses are not as widely accepted as a preffered mode of transit over any type of rail.

But the city already has rail. That's the thing. And how's that working out? When the city got more rail (Sandy Springs), it still didn't make much of a difference. I think someone once analogized this to a kid who whines for a new toy, plays with it for a few days, and then stuffs it back in the toy box and forgets about it. Transit has to be more than simply "preferred." It has to be the most practical option to generate any type of meaningful ridership. Cities like DC and Boston get high transit ridership because it costs $36 per day to park in their downtown cores. It's not because people just prefer to ride transit there.

Originally Posted by bfarley30

Buses are looked at as low class unless they are running every 2-3 minutes apart.

Then invest the money and run them 2-3 minutes apart. You can have natural gas buses, electric buses, buses with Wi-Fi, buses with comfortable seats, etc. There's nothing inherently inferior about buses, particularly from a mobility standpoint, which you think would be the most important thing in a conversation about transit.