U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 03-13-2013, 02:41 PM
 
Location: ITP
2,133 posts, read 3,964,984 times
Reputation: 1283
The Northern Arc was meant to provide a connection between the I-75 and I-85 corridors on the north side of Metro Atlanta and it would've worked wonders to alleviate east-west traffic congestion on the north side. The amount of truck traffic on the top end of the Perimeter alone justified the road. A significant amount of traffic is generated the movement of trucks to and from one of the largest concentrations of industrial space in the country along the I-85 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major urban areas in the Northeast; and the I-75 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major metropolitan areas in the Midwest. Anyone who has observed traffic patterns along State Route 20 or the top end of the Perimeter knows that there is heavy traffic between these two corridors.

This shouldn't be an issue of transit versus roads because the Northern Arc was meant as a connection between major corridors rather than a destination, which is what the top end of the Perimeter is today.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2013, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,770 posts, read 5,136,488 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by south-to-west View Post
The Northern Arc was meant to provide a connection between the I-75 and I-85 corridors on the north side of Metro Atlanta and it would've worked wonders to alleviate east-west traffic congestion on the north side. The amount of truck traffic on the top end of the Perimeter alone justified the road. A significant amount of traffic is generated the movement of trucks to and from one of the largest concentrations of industrial space in the country along the I-85 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major urban areas in the Northeast; and the I-75 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major metropolitan areas in the Midwest. Anyone who has observed traffic patterns along State Route 20 or the top end of the Perimeter knows that there is heavy traffic between these two corridors.

This shouldn't be an issue of transit versus roads because the Northern Arc was meant as a connection between major corridors rather than a destination, which is what the top end of the Perimeter is today.
This. Rep point coming.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
7,254 posts, read 3,933,415 times
Reputation: 1596
Quote:
Originally Posted by south-to-west View Post
The Northern Arc was meant to provide a connection between the I-75 and I-85 corridors on the north side of Metro Atlanta and it would've worked wonders to alleviate east-west traffic congestion on the north side. The amount of truck traffic on the top end of the Perimeter alone justified the road. A significant amount of traffic is generated the movement of trucks to and from one of the largest concentrations of industrial space in the country along the I-85 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major urban areas in the Northeast; and the I-75 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major metropolitan areas in the Midwest. Anyone who has observed traffic patterns along State Route 20 or the top end of the Perimeter knows that there is heavy traffic between these two corridors.

This shouldn't be an issue of transit versus roads because the Northern Arc was meant as a connection between major corridors rather than a destination, which is what the top end of the Perimeter is today.
The threat is the northern arc becoming the new top end perimeter.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,730 posts, read 2,752,458 times
Reputation: 1895
Quote:
Originally Posted by south-to-west View Post
The Northern Arc was meant to provide a connection between the I-75 and I-85 corridors on the north side of Metro Atlanta and it would've worked wonders to alleviate east-west traffic congestion on the north side. The amount of truck traffic on the top end of the Perimeter alone justified the road. A significant amount of traffic is generated the movement of trucks to and from one of the largest concentrations of industrial space in the country along the I-85 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major urban areas in the Northeast; and the I-75 corridor, which connects Atlanta to major metropolitan areas in the Midwest. Anyone who has observed traffic patterns along State Route 20 or the top end of the Perimeter knows that there is heavy traffic between these two corridors.

This shouldn't be an issue of transit versus roads because the Northern Arc was meant as a connection between major corridors rather than a destination, which is what the top end of the Perimeter is today.
I'm not really sure how I completely feel on the matter. I'm glad Gwinnett is doing the Sugarloaf pkwy extension, because it is good for us. My only complaint is I wish it wouldn't dead-end into Peachtree Industrial, but become a Chattohoochee river crossing and dead end into S. Forsyth. It is a high value area with high value employees, that will make high-value businesses notice Gwinnett more.

However, I must say about your comment... Don't forget that is what 285 was intended to do. When they planned it, it seemed way at the edge of town and people didn't understand that much.

Nowadays we depend on it for local travel, not a bypass. We use it in ways they didn't intend at it's outset.

So to be fair to the others arguments... What will prevent the outer perimeter from becoming like 285 is now in 30 years?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,770 posts, read 5,136,488 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
However, I must say about your comment... Don't forget that is what 285 was intended to do. When they planned it, it seemed way at the edge of town and people didn't understand that much.

Nowadays we depend on it for local travel, not a bypass. We use it in ways they didn't intend at it's outset.

So to be fair to the others arguments... What will prevent the outer perimeter from becoming like 285 is now in 30 years?
A perimeter 10 miles out from the core vs. one 40 miles or more around the core? Seriously? The geometry alone defining the area a circle encompasses says that Atlanta would have to grow bigger than NYC or LA for the dense growth we see on 285 to go onto a perimeter this far out.

Cobb, N. Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Cherokee... all areas far north of the perimeter have developed without a road, I really don't understand the fear of a limited access road and what it will cause. All of these areas have developed into dense suburban areas without an east west road anyway.

If the Atlanta region continues to tap the economic success that it has known for the last half century or more, the growth will continue to branch outward in further concentric circles. To think that a road will cause this in and of itself is thinking that makes no common sense.

The forward lack of planning is one thing that might make such growth come to a halt.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
7,254 posts, read 3,933,415 times
Reputation: 1596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
A perimeter 10 miles out from the core vs. one 40 miles or more around the core? Seriously? The geometry alone defining the area a circle encompasses says that Atlanta would have to grow bigger than NYC or LA for the dense growth we see on 285 to go onto a perimeter this far out.

Cobb, N. Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Cherokee... all areas far north of the perimeter have developed without a road, I really don't understand the fear of a limited access road and what it will cause. All of these areas have developed into dense suburban areas without an east west road anyway.

If the Atlanta region continues to tap the economic success that it has known for the last half century or more, the growth will continue to branch outward in further concentric circles. To think that a road will cause this in and of itself is thinking that makes no common sense.

The forward lack of planning is one thing that might make such growth come to a halt.
That's why growth boundaries need to be developed, to force infill development and densify what is already served by roads, transit, water, sewer, electricity. Dense development is more efficient at using infrastructure.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,730 posts, read 2,752,458 times
Reputation: 1895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
A perimeter 10 miles out from the core vs. one 40 miles or more around the core? Seriously? The geometry alone defining the area a circle encompasses says that Atlanta would have to grow bigger than NYC or LA for the dense growth we see on 285 to go onto a perimeter this far out.

Cobb, N. Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Cherokee... all areas far north of the perimeter have developed without a road, I really don't understand the fear of a limited access road and what it will cause. All of these areas have developed into dense suburban areas without an east west road anyway.

If the Atlanta region continues to tap the economic success that it has known for the last half century or more, the growth will continue to branch outward in further concentric circles. To think that a road will cause this in and of itself is thinking that makes no common sense.

The forward lack of planning is one thing that might make such growth come to a halt.
well keep in mind The original path of the Northern Arc goes right be the Mall of Georgia about 30 miles out and that area is already developed/developing, as it southern Hall county and Flowery Branch. It has grown about that far out to the Northwest and to the north as well. I guarantee the northern arc would plant the seeds of an edge city far away, simply because all the suburban areas from those 3 areas of town can get to that one point.

my problem is I want to bolster more support to arterial streets (and lack thereof), so we can make better use of existing infrastructure. Similar to what happened with the state stepping and forcing Abernathy to change through Sandy Springs. We need to do that like x 20-30 through out ITP and the northern suburbs.

I want business centers to push out in our already built suburbs, but not at the far edge of our already built suburbs. And perhaps the money would be better spent bolstering the current 13mi. northern section of 285 and restructuring the bottlenecked interchanges that only allow 1-2 lanes to switch freeways on commonly used paths.

As far as truck traffic, which someone else pointed out, we need to remember that the sheer majority of truck traffic in Atlanta goes from the southeast to the northwest. The most common paths for trucks is up I-75, the western part of I-285 and up I-75.

This is why they looked at making the truck only toll lanes on I-75 north. The state DOT also played around with looking for other bypass options to the west.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 07:06 PM
 
14,575 posts, read 9,152,381 times
Reputation: 3445
Part of the reason the arc got shot down before is that a lot of people figured that it was a huge money making scheme for landholders in the path of the highway.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,770 posts, read 5,136,488 times
Reputation: 2924
Just for comparison, here is a map of the limited access roads here in the Dallas Fort Worth area. The green roads are toll roads, the others multi-lane limited access freeways. This does not include an outer beltway being mapped to encircle the whole region. Would be interesting to overlay this on Atlanta... even just the Dallas side without Fort Worth... to see what an improvent to traffic flow this kind of road network would do for the Atlanta region. Note the great east/west access to the north of Dallas.

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,770 posts, read 5,136,488 times
Reputation: 2924
This one is a little more confusing as it is showing several options for the DFW Outer Loop. Still in design and planning stages. But this is similar to the failed Atlanta Outer Loop of which the Northern Arc was to be the top portion.


Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top