Sprawl Is Good for You (Atlanta: 2014, public transportation, oil)

[arjay57]

Nice to see someone sticking up for the ATL for a change.

....[M]ost trips in virtually all affluent urban areas worldwide are by private vehicle and public transportation, outside the very center of a few American cities, is a negligible factor in the overall transportation picture. The result, according to a wide range of data from organizations like the Texas Transportation Institute and INRIX, is that the greatest congestion and longest commuting times in this country, as elsewhere in the affluent world, tend to occur in the largest and densest urban areas like Paris or New York and the least congestion and shortest commuting times in lower-density areas like Phoenix or Kansas City.

It is true that Atlanta’s congestion is much worse than its low density might indicate. The reasons for this are complex, but two important ones jump to the eye. The first is that because of its irregular topography and complex historic land-ownership patterns, Atlanta’s road system is choppy and disconnected. This would not be so problematic if the city had an adequate freeway system. However—and despite Atlanta’s reputation as a paradise for cars—this system is much less developed than it should be for a city its size, and it funnels a large percentage of traffic right through the heart of the city instead of diverting more of it around the center.

More...Sprawl Is Good for You: Why urban yuppies have it all wrong.

[MattCW]

All that said is that in places with less transit, there is less transit use, and that you can get bigger lots in the suburbs. It reads as nothing more than a puff piece by the asphalt and oil lobby to try and convince people to do nothing but build road roads and more roads! The fact that this publication is known for its right-leaning stance only leads credence this.

Look arjay, we all know by now that you want to have 5 acre lots right downtown to get some "elbow room" but you're not helping yourself with this article.

[rapier7]

Politico has a right leaning stance? Come on, man.

I think the article has some pretty good arguments. The fact is population growth and migration patterns have favored southern states for the past three decades. Those trends have undoubtedly been helped by the fact that land is a lot cheaper in metropolitan areas in the Sunbelt.

[Serious Conversation]

Southern states are still overwhelmingly poorer, less developed, less educated, less wealthy, and virtually every negative metric is higher in Southern states than denser northern states.

[Iconographer]

Southern states BAAAAAD. BAAAD.
Sprawl BAAAAADD too.
Didn't you know? Welcome to CD.

[magnetar]

lol, what a mess. Can anyone else help think of some other reasons why Kansas City, population 2.3 million; and Phoenix, population 3.2 million; has less traffic than Paris, population 12 million?

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Nice to see someone sticking up for the ATL for a change.

That article isn't sticking up for Atlanta; it's basically lambasting it for having a subpar highway system which is something Atlantans themselves complain about. In many of the 'burbs, your only options for getting from one part of the metro to the other is either the interstate or two-lane country roads running through residential areas. This is an indictment, not a defense.

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Southern states are still overwhelmingly poorer, less developed, less educated, less wealthy, and virtually every negative metric is higher in Southern states than denser northern states.

This actually has very little to do with the subject at hand.

[-thomass]

what do people do in low density, non-walkable suburbs? I don't get the attraction, especially if you don't have any kids.

[magnetar]

Originally Posted by -thomass

what do people do in low density, non-walkable suburbs? I don't get the attraction, especially if you don't have any kids.

Cook meth.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by -thomass

what do people do in low density, non-walkable suburbs? I don't get the attraction, especially if you don't have any kids.

What are kids supposed to do in low-density, non-walkable suburbs.