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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-11-2015, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Decatur, GA
5,059 posts, read 3,846,475 times
Reputation: 2582

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
That is because the existence of a train to take riders farther in more comfort, faster speeds, and more reliable headways. MARTA's current bus system is set up to feed into the stations. This hurts some routes, but helps others.
Outside of maybe 6 routes, MARTA's buses are useless! Utterly USELESS! Maybe the intent was to "feed" into the stations, but they only "feed" from about the last half mile or so, or they are such long, ridiculous headways that it doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
We should be focusing "mass" transit on areas where there is a mass of people. That means the 5 core counties. Its just not efficient to build to Gainesville. Nor should we be encouraging "mass" density in jobs and people that far out. The more jobs get spread out, the more difficult it is to transport people, whether by roads or transit. Hall County needs to stay a suburban, low density type county for the forseeable future. There's plenty of land and opportunities in the 5 core counties.
No one is seriously proposing running HRT on 10-minute headways to Gainesville. Gainesville would definitely benefit from commuter rail run on the existing NS freight line with maybe 15-20 minute headways at the rush hours stretching to 1 hour headways off-peak and longer headways at night.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
*SNIP*
Those are some excellent points about why commuter rail lines should use overhead power, which I agree with.

But with Metro Atlanta already having an excellent foundation for a regional high-capacity rail transit system in place with MARTA, and with many sections of existing freight rail trackage being near, at or overcapacity with freight rail traffic,
No, they aren't. There are a few lines that are busy, and Howell junction needs a good redesign, but that's it. Outside I-285, virtually all the lines except NS's western line become single-track with passing sidings operating at reduced speeds. Most of those used to be full double-track. Even so, CSX's own traffic study from just a few years ago listed the Cobb line as having surplus capacity, so the lame excuse of "no capacity" simply doesn't fly.
Quote:
any future expansion of the Atlanta's region's high-capacity rail transit network should probably utilize the same Heavy Rail Transit technology that MARTA uses.
No, it shouldn't. MARTA is inappropriate for much beyond I-285, I-20 East and GA-400 must be exceptions since they would require all-new RoW anyways, but their termini are the absolute limits for HRT service out from Atlanta. Running on existing RoW saves at least five times the money as an all-new RoW does and for just about all the corridors, will provide more than adequate service able to meet growth for many decades to come.
Quote:
Unlike other very large major metro regions with regional commuter rail service in North America, the Atlanta metro region does not seem to have the excess freight rail capacity and trackage on which to operate a high-capacity and high-frequency of regional commuter rail service.

This is especially the case in the northwest quadrant of the Atlanta metro region where freight trains already may often sit in gridlock from the Howell Junction area northwest into Cobb County where one of the largest and busiest freight rail multimodal transfer yards in the entire Western Hemisphere is located in the Austell area.
See above.
Quote:
The existing freight rail network needs to be expanded just to accommodate the sharply rising volumes of freight rail traffic that is moving through the area....Something which makes any attempts to operate high-capacity passenger rail transit on existing freight rail tracks an impossibility throughout much of the Atlanta metro region in many cases.
While the freight network does need to be improved, any improvements for passenger service would likely exceed the requirements of existing and future freight needs.
Quote:
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system (an HRT system which was intended to be a regional high-capacity rail transit system in light of the Atlanta region's severely-constrained freight rail network) to power an expanded regional rail transit network would mean that transfers could be minimized....Meaning that, for example, more one-seat regional rail transit rides could be provided between important centers of regional activity like the world-leading Atlanta Airport, etc, and fast-growing heavily-populated outlying areas like the I-75/I-575 Northwest, GA 400 North and I-85/I-985/GA 316 Northeast corridors, etc.
Not everyone can have a one-seat ride. While nice, it's not a requirement and shouldn't be an "at all costs" requirement if it will cause the rest of the system to be overpriced.
Quote:
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system also means that commuter trains could use the same exact transit facilities that the MARTA HRT system uses for its rail transit operations as needed.
Wrong, Avondale and Armor are near enough to capacity that even using the South Yard again, any silly "HRT to Athens/Gainesville/Chattanooga" or whatever you're proposing would overwhelm the existing yards. Yards are a minor part of any rail service anyways. Important, yes, but hardly any big deal.
Quote:
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system basically means regional commuter rail service could be provided on HRT tracks in the form of express, zone and skip-stop regional HRT service.
No, it won't! You'd have to expand all existing MARTA track to four tracks to pull something like that off.

Another big issue is the lack of scale with 3rd rail. Using low-voltage DC is hardly ideal, any electrified commuter rail service should use 25kV overhead like Denver is using. With low-voltage DC, a substation with all its complex rectification and switchgear is required about every mile. With high-voltage AC, a substation with a transformer, a few circuit breakers, and some capacitors to filter harmonics is only needed maybe every 10 miles or more. Amtrak's 60 Hz traction power system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The higher voltage is far more efficient, and can deliver far more power which is important in longer-distance runs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311 View Post
Aren't there some sort of major restrictions on trains that can run on shared trackage w/ freight v transit trains?
Yes (see below)
Quote:
Could a commuter train share tracks with HRT like MARTA?
No, quite simply, the Federal Railroad Administration won't allow it. MARTA trains and other transit vehicles aren't built to the same crash standards as national-network passenger vehicles and so are prohibited from sharing tracks except under time share agreements where the freight is prohibited during passenger hours which is an unworkable situation around Atlanta. (See NJT's RiverLine or COASTER's SPRINTER for examples of this)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-11-2015, 08:05 PM
 
5,853 posts, read 5,193,393 times
Reputation: 3921
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
We should be focusing "mass" transit on areas where there is a mass of people. That means the 5 core counties. Its just not efficient to build to Gainesville. Nor should we be encouraging "mass" density in jobs and people that far out. The more jobs get spread out, the more difficult it is to transport people, whether by roads or transit. Hall County needs to stay a suburban, low density type county for the forseeable future. There's plenty of land and opportunities in the 5 core counties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toll_booth View Post
This is even more important to me than expanding transit everywhere. I really really wish metro Atlanta would enact urban growth boundaries to (1) counter sprawl, (2) increase the proclivity of denser, better-connected urban neighborhoods, and--this part gets forgotten a lot--(3) to preserve the rural way of life for exurban counties.
These are excellent points by bu2 and toll_booth with which I fully agree.

But...

> With the presence of Lake Lanier (an increasingly extremely valued commodity in a landlocked large major metro region like Atlanta)...

> The presence of the Interstate 985/Georgia 365 spur roadway...

> A major freight rail corridor in the NS Railway/Southern Railroad right-of-way...

> An extremely advantageous location next to fast-growing and heavily-populated super-suburban Gwinnett County (...a location which has caused much development to spillover from Gwinnett County into Hall County)...

> The nearby presence of the scenic Blue Ridge/Southern Appalachian Mountains of North Georgia...

> And domineering business and political classes in the county created by the status of the county as a hub of business, industry, education and politics for Northeast Georgia (...Hall County's largest city and seat of government in Gainesville is reported to be one of the world's biggest poultry processing hubs while both the sitting Governor and Lt. Governor of the state of Georgia hail from Hall County)...

...We don't have to do much to encourage increased density of jobs, people and development in a county as far out from Atlanta as Hall County is....The above-mentioned amenities and resources are what has encouraged the increasing density of jobs, people and development in a county as far out from Atlanta as Hall County is.

Seemingly far-flung exurban Hall County was slated to experience heavy growth from the moment that such highly-valuable pieces of infrastructure like Lake Lanier and the I-985/GA 365 spur were proposed to be built within the county.

I completely agree that there needs to be a very strong emphasis on increasing and maximizing densities of jobs, people and development within the 5-county core of Metro Atlanta

...But we cannot keep fast-growing and heavily-populated areas outside of Metro Atlanta's 5-county core from growing and attracting jobs and economic development, particularly in areas like Hall County that are loaded with amenities and represented by extremely-powerful political classes that dominate Georgia politics at the state level.

If anything, if we want to get and solidify state political support to expand high-capacity within the 5-county core of the Atlanta metro region, we have to always be appearing to get as much of the rest of the state as we can in on the robust growth and prosperity that the Atlanta metro region has enjoyed over the last 7 decades and continues to enjoy.

Oakwood, Georgia (which is a very small but highly commercialized town south of Gainesville that benefits highly from the presence of the Gainesville Campus of the University of North Georgia and a busy interchange at I-985 and GA 53) has plans to actively get in on the prosperity that the Atlanta metro region has enjoyed with their plans to build a downtown village area around a future station on a high-capacity passenger rail transit line along the right-of-way of the NS/Southern Railroad line.
Oakwood 2030

It should also be noted that the most fast-growing type of development in Hall County is not high-density mixed-use development.

The most fast-growing type of development in Hall County right now is industrial development, mainly manufacturing, distribution and warehousing facilities because of the presence of I-985, the NS Railway freight rail line, nearby Lake Lanier and political leadership that has been very aggressive in recruiting new industry to the county.

In any case, with the Atlanta region's worsening traffic congestion issues, high-capacity passenger rail transit cannot just be built to serve and operate in (and promote and encourage) more densely-developed areas in the 5-county urban core of the Atlanta metro region with local HRT service.....High-capacity passenger rail transit also has to be built to serve and operate in lower-density areas on the outer-suburban and exurban outer fringes of the 39-county Atlanta metro region with express regional HRT service out to seemingly far-flung but very important areas like Gainesville and Hall County.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
I did a quick check on density of the surrounding counties based on the 2014 census estimates-people per square mile:
DeKalb 2,586
Cobb 2,026
Gwinnett 1,871
Clayton 1,833
Fulton 1,748

Then its a big drop:
Forsyth 783
Douglas 662
Rockdale 657
Henry 633
Fayette 548
Cherokee 508
Hall 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by toll_booth View Post
Good finds.

Don't forget employment density as well. Many people use MARTA to commute to and from work.
I agree that those population density numbers are good finds by bu2.

One interesting fact of note is that Loudoun County, Virginia (which is an outer suburb of Washington D.C. that is somewhat similar to the Atlanta outer suburb of Forsyth County) is slated to receive regional Heavy Rail Transit service via an extension of the D.C. Metro Silver HRT Line from neighboring heavily-populated mega-suburb Fairfax County, Virginia.

Loudoun County, Virginia is slated to receive regional HRT service despite having an overall population density of only about 698 persons per square mile....A population density that is lower than that of Atlanta's outer-suburban Forsyth County.

Another interesting fact of note is that neighboring Northern Virginia and D.C. suburbs Loudoun and Fairfax counties are reported to rank first and second, respectively, in median household income in the entire U.S.

(...Loudoun County, VA reportedly ranks first in the U.S. in median household income and neighboring Fairfax County, VA reported ranks second in the U.S. in median household income.)

It should also be noted that the population density figures for outer-suburban Metro Atlanta counties that bu2 posted are not uniform throughout the entirety of those counties.

In just about all of the counties posted, population density is higher in one portion or one half of a county (usually the portion of the outer-suburban county that is closest to Atlanta) than it is in the other portion or half of an outer-suburban county.

Population densities are substantially higher in the much more heavily-developed southern half of outer-suburban counties like Cherokee, Forsyth and Hall that are closest to Atlanta than they are in the much more sparsely-developed and rural northern halves of those counties that are farthest away from Atlanta.

For example, in Cherokee County which has an overall population density of only about 508 square miles, the population density is as high as 2,390 persons per square mile within the city of Woodstock....A relatively higher population density which balances out the extreme low population densities in the northern half where the density may be as low as 5-10 persons per square mile in some areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2015, 09:23 PM
 
28,607 posts, read 25,368,893 times
Reputation: 9872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
One One interesting fact of note is that Loudoun County, Virginia (which is an outer suburb of Washington D.C. that is somewhat similar to the Atlanta outer suburb of Forsyth County) is slated to receive regional Heavy Rail Transit service via an extension of the D.C. Metro Silver HRT Line from neighboring heavily-populated mega-suburb Fairfax County, Virginia.

Loudoun County, Virginia is slated to receive regional HRT service despite having an overall population density of only about 698 persons per square mile....A population density that is lower than that of Atlanta's outer-suburban Forsyth County.

Another interesting fact of note is that neighboring Northern Virginia and D.C. suburbs Loudoun and Fairfax counties are reported to rank first and second, respectively, in median household income in the entire U.S.

(...Loudoun County, VA reportedly ranks first in the U.S. in median household income and neighboring Fairfax County, VA reported ranks second in the U.S. in median household income.).
Loudoun has also maintained an excellent ER ratio.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:42 AM
 
5,853 posts, read 5,193,393 times
Reputation: 3921
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
No one is seriously proposing running HRT on 10-minute headways to Gainesville. Gainesville would definitely benefit from commuter rail run on the existing NS freight line with maybe 15-20 minute headways at the rush hours stretching to 1 hour headways off-peak and longer headways at night.
Beyond the Hall County side of Buford/Lake Lanier Islands area (GA 347/Lanier Islands Parkway) the headways for high-capacity passenger rail transit service could maybe be negotiable as long as the headways don't drop below 15-minute during peak hours.

Though with that I-985/South Hall County corridor being a very fast-growing area between Buford and Gainesville, that area will likely need more than 1 hour headways during off-peak hours.

That's because there is a massive amount of growth occurring in Hall County along the I-985 corridor, particularly with the amount of new industrial development that is being built throughout that area.

There is also the Gainesville Campus of the University of North Georgia (formerly Gainesville State College) that has much growth potential with the continued population growth throughout OTP Northeast Metro Atlanta.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
But with Metro Atlanta already having an excellent foundation for a regional high-capacity rail transit system in place with MARTA, and with many sections of existing freight rail trackage being near, at or overcapacity with freight rail traffic
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
No, they aren't. There are a few lines that are busy, and Howell junction needs a good redesign, but that's it. Outside I-285, virtually all the lines except NS's western line become single-track with passing sidings operating at reduced speeds. Most of those used to be full double-track. Even so, CSX's own traffic study from just a few years ago listed the Cobb line as having surplus capacity, so the lame excuse of "no capacity" simply doesn't fly.
But that section of CSX/W&A freight rail track between Atlanta and Cartersville is one of the busiest in all of North America.

MAYBE some LIMITED regional commuter rail service could be added to the existing CSX/W&A track between Atlanta and Cartersville if a second track was added to almost all of the single-tracked sections of the freight rail line between the Chattahoochee River and Smyrna.

...But the powerful Vinings Homeowners Association (which has been a massive roadblock to expanded rail service on any kind on the CSX/W&A) remains adamantly opposed to any expansion of the existing CSX/W&A tracks through the Vinings area (which is a major reason why the CSX/W&A line remains single-tracked through the Vinings area between Campbell Road and the Chattahoochee River)....Which means that any expansion of trackage for the accommodation of additional freight trains and/or new passenger trains would likely also require that stretch of rail right-of-way to be tunneled through the Vinings area....Which is an idea that has been bandied about for many years.

Even if some limited regional commuter rail service could be implemented on the existing tracks of the CSX/W&A with the addition a second track to the sections that are currently single-tracked, heavily-populated Cobb County and that I-75/US 41-anchored Northwest Metro Atlanta corridor desperately need more than just limited volumes of commuter rail service on tracks shared with extremely high (and fast-growing) volumes of freight trains.

Cobb County (with a current population of 731,000 residents) and Northwest Metro Atlanta (over 1.2 million residents in Cobb, Cherokee, Paulding and Bartow counties combined) desperately needs high-capacity passenger rail transit service on mostly grade-separated passenger rail-dedicated tracks.

That area desperately needs high-capacity passenger rail transit dedicated tracks to accommodate the additional passenger rail trains that will be needed to accommodate the continuing explosive population growth in that I-75/I-575/US 41 Northwest corridor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
any future expansion of the Atlanta's region's high-capacity rail transit network should probably utilize the same Heavy Rail Transit technology that MARTA uses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
No, it shouldn't. MARTA is inappropriate for much beyond I-285, I-20 East and GA-400 must be exceptions since they would require all-new RoW anyways, but their termini are the absolute limits for HRT service out from Atlanta. Running on existing RoW saves at least five times the money as an all-new RoW does and for just about all the corridors, will provide more than adequate service able to meet growth for many decades to come.
If the implementation of HRT service is under serious consideration for the relatively very low-density I-20 East corridor OTP in DeKalb County, then regional HRT service should absolutely and most definitely be under consideration for the relatively much higher density I-75/I-575/US 41 Northwest and I-85/I-985/GA 316 Northeast corridors....Two radial transportation corridors that have the most crushing population growth, the most severe traffic congestion and the most job growth in the entire Atlanta metro region outside of the GA 400 North corridor.

It is going to cost A LOT to bring our regional rail transit system up to where it should be by early 21st Century standards, but it is money that we should have been spending all along to maintain and expand our rail transit network to where it is needed.

And besides, money really should not be an issue if we pay for transit upgrades the right way which is through large-scale Public-Private Partnerships (...large-scale P3's funded with revenues and profits from large-scale transit-oriented real estate development at and around stations and along transit lines (even bus lines), Value Capture taxing, the aggressive sales of large and small private sponsorships and distance-based fares).

With the population of the Atlanta region widely expected to grow into the range of 8-10 million residents, the region is going to need A LOT of high-capacity transit service (both rail and bus) to move people around, particularly with our highly (and often severely) constrained road network.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
While the freight network does need to be improved, any improvements for passenger service would likely exceed the requirements of existing and future freight needs.
That's good that improvements for passenger rail service could potentially help existing and future freight rail needs.

But with the Port of Savannah seeming to frequently shatter cargo/freight-handling records years ahead of schedule and with the Atlanta metro region continuing to grow explosively beyond its road network's ability to handle the additional traffic that is continuously being generated, I strongly question the wisdom of attempting to operate high volumes of freight trains and high volumes of passenger trains on the same exact tracks....Particularly when both freight trains and passenger trains are going to need the capacity to grow in volume.

Maybe we could operate demo commuter trains on existing tracks where applicable for a very limited period of time until dedicated passenger rail transit-only tracks are brought online.

...But attempting to have high volumes of freight and passenger trains share the same railroad tracks just does not seem to be a viable long-term solution in a very fast-growing large major metro region where freight rail traffic volumes continue to explode and passenger rail traffic volumes will likely also need to grow after coming online.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system (an HRT system which was intended to be a regional high-capacity rail transit system in light of the Atlanta region's severely-constrained freight rail network) to power an expanded regional rail transit network would mean that transfers could be minimized....Meaning that, for example, more one-seat regional rail transit rides could be provided between important centers of regional activity like the world-leading Atlanta Airport, etc, and fast-growing heavily-populated outlying areas like the I-75/I-575 Northwest, GA 400 North and I-85/I-985/GA 316 Northeast corridors, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
Not everyone can have a one-seat ride. While nice, it's not a requirement and shouldn't be an "at all costs" requirement if it will cause the rest of the system to be overpriced.
The rest of an expansive regional high-capacity rail transit system does not have to be overpriced if outlying locations of great importance (like Cartersville, Dawsonville and (ESPECIALLY) Gainesville and Athens) have one-seat regional HRT rides to and from the Atlanta region's #1 economic and logistical asset at the world-leading Atlanta Airport.

Those one-seat rides between those aforementioned outlying areas and the Atlanta Airport would be mostly subsidized with profits from new real estate development and fees from existing real estate development along the lines as well as the aggressive sales of private sponsorships both large and small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system also means that commuter trains could use the same exact transit facilities that the MARTA HRT system uses for its rail transit operations as needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
Wrong, Avondale and Armor are near enough to capacity that even using the South Yard again, any silly "HRT to Athens/Gainesville/Chattanooga" or whatever you're proposing would overwhelm the existing yards. Yards are a minor part of any rail service anyways. Important, yes, but hardly any big deal.
When I said "same exact facilities", I meant much more along the lines of stations and tracks than existing rail yards.

Obviously, if the existing rail transit network is vastly expanded in size, the number of rail yards would also need to be expanded to accommodate the vastly expanded amount of rail cars in operation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll View Post
Using the same 3rd rail HRT technology that MARTA uses to power its HRT system basically means regional commuter rail service could be provided on HRT tracks in the form of express, zone and skip-stop regional HRT service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
No, it won't! You'd have to expand all existing MARTA track to four tracks to pull something like that off.
Well we would not necessarily have to expand all existing MARTA track to four tracks, but we likely would have to build many more passing sidings and add more track throughout many sections of the system....But that is the cost of being a very-large major metro region....A very large major metro region whose state government has not made any significant investments in transportation in a very long time while totally ignoring transit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:53 AM
bu2
 
9,344 posts, read 5,986,515 times
Reputation: 3771
Quote:
Originally Posted by toll_booth View Post
This is even more important to me than expanding transit everywhere. I really really wish metro Atlanta would enact urban growth boundaries to (1) counter sprawl, (2) increase the proclivity of denser, better-connected urban neighborhoods, and--this part gets forgotten a lot--(3) to preserve the rural way of life for exurban counties.



Good finds.

Don't forget employment density as well. Many people use MARTA to commute to and from work.
Didn't think about looking for that data. Figured it would be hard to find. But, in fact, the same census look-up table did have some job related data for each county.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 02:01 AM
bu2
 
9,344 posts, read 5,986,515 times
Reputation: 3771
Quote:
Originally Posted by golden eagles fan View Post
Lexington, KY, has an urban growth boundary that was designed to protect horse farms from sprawl.
I remember reading somewhere that pilots said there was no place in the country with such a clear delineation.

But I don't think its feasible here. Or necessarily desirable. But the ARC is doing the opposite and trying to encourage every town in the area to create dense town centers. With transportation dollars, we can encourage high density growth in some places and lower density in others. And the core counties can get on board. A lot of the outer counties don't really want it-see the history of the northern arc. The same mentality quickly shot down that proposal coming out of Cartersville for a western arc. None of the counties south of Cartersville wanted it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,787 posts, read 16,795,176 times
Reputation: 5133
Quote:
...But the powerful Vinings Homeowners Association (which has been a massive roadblock to expanded rail service on any kind on the CSX/W&A) remains adamantly opposed to any expansion of the existing CSX/W&A tracks through the Vinings area (which is a major reason why the CSX/W&A line remains single-tracked through the Vinings area between Campbell Road and the Chattahoochee River)....Which means that any expansion of trackage for the accommodation of additional freight trains and/or new passenger trains would likely also require that stretch of rail right-of-way to be tunneled through the Vinings area....Which is an idea that has been bandied about for many years.
I don't see how a HOA can stop a powerful railroad company from adding back track it removed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 10:37 AM
bu2
 
9,344 posts, read 5,986,515 times
Reputation: 3771
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
I don't see how a HOA can stop a powerful railroad company from adding back track it removed.
Railroads tend to have a lot of power. The laws granted them that in order to encourage them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 11:01 AM
 
28,607 posts, read 25,368,893 times
Reputation: 9872
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
I don't see how a HOA can stop a powerful railroad company from adding back track it removed.
You get a bunch of taxpayers reared up on their hind legs and they will surprise you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 11:23 AM
 
33 posts, read 35,206 times
Reputation: 45
I don't get this and it's really ludicrous. Gwinnett County is a suburban area. The people who moved there did so of their own volition knowing that by purchasing a home in Gwinett County they were purchasing a suburban lifestyle. A suburban lifestyle involves driving a car. If you want easy transit you move to the city, you don't move to a suburb that was built for cars and then demand the amenities of a city, that's insane.


I read an article interviewing a multigenerational resident of Doraville in the 90s, he said that the influx of newcomers was "destroying our way of life"

He was right. This is a great example of newcomers moving in and changing things. This isn't about racism or Moving Africans Rapidly Through Atlanta, this is about knowingly moving to a community that's been established one way and changing it with no respect to the people who have been there for ages. Disgraceful.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top