Atlanta #1 Metro area for sprawl (Forest Park: statistics, homeless, food)

[onemanarmy]

Originally Posted by Gulch

I guess you don't count drunk drivers killing people as "hurting someone on the road."

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Good sarcasm! But, nonetheless, I'll drive from now on.

Someone obviously missed it.....

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by onemanarmy

Someone obviously missed it.....

Yup!

[Gulch]

Originally Posted by onemanarmy

Someone obviously missed it.....

Oops, had the sarcasm detector off.

Carry on.

[kayoticworld]

Originally Posted by kayoticworld

Here is a comment from someone on the AJC site. Kind of the same point I was making

"Having lived in several large metros, I've observed that the sprawl in Atlanta isn't limited to just far flung neighborhoods. It's how you all think. You have no sense of community or neighborly concern. You only really care about yourselves and your little chunk of the forest. It's evident in your attitudes, conversations, travel patterns, and politics. The developers only build what you all buy."

Can someone (who is completely on the "Elbow room" side) please explain to me how our current situation is sustainable? Much less, how can we handle 3 million more people continually building the way the region has grown? I stated earlier I am not against "Elbow room' for those who seek that kind of lifestyle. But for our city to be sustainable we have to also look at densifiying, investing in infrastructure including mass/public transit and to a lesser degree roads. Let’s not even throw in the water situation that no one is paying attention to until we have another drought. Going to sleep and hoping the problems magically disappear in the morning is not the answer. I hear all these objections to density and transit but really no other solutions. Elbow room at what cost? Maybe just install signs on the outer metro ring stating we are full, no vacancy? I guess we shouldn’t have ever built an airport in this city either. I mean, you can get there in your car and all with plenty of elbow room . Maybe everybody just wants what they want and it make this comment above seem more and more accurate.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by PJA

Because everybody isn't going to use mass transit. You assume that just because they build an extensive mass transit system, that everyone will use that.

It's wrong not to give them that option especially when the alternative is to do what amounts to nothing. Many many many people would take transit if it was actually available to them, but for the vast majority of Metro Atlantans, it simply is not.

Yet in NYC, which has the best public transit, people still sit in traffic why.....because they prefer driving.

Traffic on four-lane highways instead of the eight-lane highways we have. But imagine how much worse those roads would be without transit.

[PJA]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I think most prefer not to drive if they had a viable alternative.

Besides, wouldn't more people prefer mansions and ice cream than sitting in traffic? Lets divert our tax dollars there.

This of course is all ridiculous, and just goes to point out how we should let people make their own decisions with how to spend their transportation dollars directly. The best way we can improve life is reducing the subsidies for roads and give people the choice how their dollar is spent instead of it being a government decision.

Has nothing to do with the discussion as mansions and ice cream do nothing to alleviate traffic. Thought we were having a serious and meaningful dialogue but Alas.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

"Around"? The mountains are far to the north of Atlanta. You can't see much of any hills in Atlanta.

No hills in Atlanta.
Again down the rabbit hole we go.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

No hills in Atlanta.
Again down the rabbit hole we go.

No, just can't see them.

[Born 2 Roll]

Originally Posted by PJA

But since the government insists on continuing to tax us, I would rather most of those taxes go to where it will benefit the most...and that is road infrastructure. However public transportation should continue to be funded as well for those who cant afford cars and for those who just want that option. In an ideal world both would be privatized.....but we know the government isn't going to let that happen.

Well, actually the federal government just might let the privatization of the transportation network happen, particularly if Congress does not pass a new transportation funding bill before the end of September.

There's also a movement afoot on Capitol Hill to decrease the federal motor fuels tax from the current 18.4 cents-per-gallon down to about 3.7 cents-per-gallon so that states would be free to raise transportation funds on their own from sources that would presumably include privatization of many controlled-access portions of major highways.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll

Well, actually the federal government just might let the privatization of the transportation network happen, particularly if Congress does not pass a new transportation funding bill before the end of September.

There's also a movement afoot on Capitol Hill to decrease the federal motor fuels tax from the current 18.4 cents-per-gallon down to about 3.7 cents-per-gallon so that states would be free to raise transportation funds on their own from sources that would presumably include privatization of many controlled-access portions of major highways.

That would be great. Any sources that talk about this more? How much traction does it this have?

Not a fan of the currently proposed budget that includes another bail-out for the Highway Fund. It needs to be reformed and privatized.